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

Lourdes Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center

2300 Watkins Lake Rd, Waterford, MI 48328 · Non profit - Church related · 80 certified beds · (248) 886-5613 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (248) 886-5613 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)2 actual-harm citations$15,593 in federal fines
Insights

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

In its favor
  • a strong health-inspection score (5/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (25% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has 2 actual-harm citations
  • the CMS record shows $15,593 in federal fines (most recent 2023-08-24)

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.

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

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★ 2/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3145 Dixie Hwy · (248) 674-8530 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
Grocery
Meijer1.0 mi
4200 Highland Rd · (248) 682-7200 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1702 Scott Lake Rd · (248) 858-0916 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship

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

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

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

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating held steady at 5 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 rating5★
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 increased16.8%10.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.5%5.4%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.9%1.5%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.3%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury0.0%3.0%3.3%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened14.4%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication13.5%19.4%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers3.9%5.1%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.5%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table2.7%14.8%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.1%1.4%better
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine89.5%79.5%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.2%24.0%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit10.7%11.7%12.0%better
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days2.141.841.67worse
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days0.001.641.80better

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

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

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

62.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 256 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.1%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
64.9%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.60U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.30hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.23hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.06hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 64.9% 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 171 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 0.60 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 88% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 15% 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 SNF62.6%CMS range 56.7–68.051.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.1%CMS range 9.2–17.110.7%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 discharge64.9%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 discharge63.2%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 discharge69.0%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 identified98.5%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 setting100.0%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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 worsened4.5%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 hospitalization6.8%CMS range 3.9–11.17.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.831.02Oct 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

0.86
RN hours/ resident / day
1.05
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.07
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.99
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.63
RN hoursweekends
25.3%
Total nursing turnover
53.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 70.0 residents a day — about 88% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.99 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.86 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.07 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 3.53 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.17 on weekdays — 15% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.96 to 0.63 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 25% is below the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

1
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-08-28)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2024-07-23)

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.

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

  • Actual harm · Gdisputed · IDR2026-06-29 · tag F0685 — isolated
    Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.
    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 Complaint 3052364Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure vision services were provided for one (R801) of two residents reviewed for vision services resulting in emergency laser surgery to reduce eye pressure and lost vision in the left eye. Findings include:A complaint was filed with the State Agency [SA] that alleged in part, .[R801] complained of eye pain and asked about seeing an eye doctor, was told. that she is on the eye doctor list. she was diagnosed with glaucoma in 2015. [R801] again requested Tylenol for her eye pain and asked to see an eye doctor 6/15/25. is on the list for their next visit. continued to express eye pain and discomfort, so the family coordinated an off-site eye appointment. eye pressure was alarmingly high, so the optometrist referred her to an ophthalmologist. told time is of the essence to save her eye sight due to the high pressures 1/9/26. performed emergency same-day laser to both eyes . confirmed [R801] is now…

    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 · G2023-08-24 · 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 Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to implement adequate, effective resident specific interventions for a resident with a diagnosis of dementia and a history of a fall, failed to communicate effectively from the therapy staff to the nursing staff and document/implement the safest mode of transferring and ambulation for one (R15) of three residents reviewed for falls, resulting in the resident to have been transferred and admitted to the hospital for a higher level of care, identified to have a right parietal scalp hematoma and laceration that required five staples and an acute right-sided subdural hematoma measuring 0.9 cm (centimeters) in thickness and causing mild mass effect on the subjacent right frontal lobe. Findings include: On 8/22/23 at 9:39 AM, R15 was observed sitting in their wheelchair in the community room watching television. During an interview with R15, the resident mentioned they had a fall that required stitches to the back of their head. Review of the…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-08-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure wound treatments/interventions were completed for one resident (R21) of one resident reviewed for pressure ulcers. Findings include:On 8/26/2025 at approximately 8:38 a.m., R21 was observed in their room, laying in their bed. R21 was observed laying in the supine position in the middle of the bed without any wedges or pillows offloading pressure of their sacral area. On 8/27/25 at approximately 10:11 a.m., R21 was observed in their room, laying in their bed. R21 was observed laying in the supine position in the middle of the bed without any positing wedges or pillows offloading pressure of their sacral area. On 8/27/25 the medical record for R21 was reviewed and revealed the following: R21 was initially admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses including Pressure Ulcer Sacral Region Stage 4 and Venous insufficiency. A review of R21's careplan revealed the following: A review of R21's careplan revealed the following: [R21]…

    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 · F2024-07-23 · 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 sanitary conditions in the kitchen and failed to ensure dishware was properly sanitized. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents that consume food from the kitchen. Findings include: On 7/22/24 between 11:00 AM-11:30 AM, during a kitchen tour with Director of Dining E, the following was observed: In the dry storage room, there was a buildup of dust, trash and food debris on the floor under the racks. In addition, there was a box of bananas, with numerous bananas that were completely black, and several that were split open. There were fruit flies observed swarming inside the box. When queried, Director of Dining E stated, We usually freeze them for banana bread when they get ripe, but those need to get tossed. According to the 2017 FDA Food Code section 6-501.111 Controlling Pests, The PREMISES shall be maintained free of insects, rodents, and other pests. The presence of insects, rodents, and other pests shall be controlled to eliminate their presence on the PREMISES by: .4.…

    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 · E2024-07-23 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly utilize personal protective equipment (PPE) for three (R20, R53, and R169) of three residents reviewed for transmission based precautions (TBP). Findings include: On 7/22/24 at 9:08 AM, staff were observed in R169's room wearing a gown and gloves. Signage was observed on the door that indicated R169 was on contact precautions (TBP intended to prevent transmission of infectious agents via contact with the person or their environment). The signage indicated a gown and gloves were to be donned when entering R169's room. Coat hooks were observed inside of R169's room labeled CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) and Nurse. On 7/22/24 at 3:02 PM, R169 was observed sleeping in bed. Reusable gowns were observed hanging on hooks inside of the room. A family member was observed seated in a chair in the room without any PPE on. On 7/22/24 at 3:15 PM, an interview was conducted with Registered Nurse (RN) 'A'. When queried about why R169 was 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-07-23 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement 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 non-pharmacological interventions were utilized prior to the use of an as needed anti-anxiety medication for one resident (R23) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for inappropriate use of an anti-anxiety medication. Findings include: On 7/22/24 at 10:22 AM, a review of R23's clinical record revealed they admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included: dementia, major depressive disorder and adjustment disorder. R23's most recent completed Minimum Data Set assessment dated [DATE] revealed R23 had mild cognitive impairment and was independent with most activities of daily living. A review of R23's orders revealed an order dated 7/2/24 for Xanax (anti-anxiety medication) 0.25 milligrams every 12 hours as needed for 14 days. R23's medication administration record (MAR) revealed a dose of the medication was given on 7/10/24 at 1:05 PM. A Behavior Note dated 7/10/24 at 8:03 PM entered…

    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 · D2024-07-23 · 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

    Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain labs in a timely matter for one resident, (R81) of one resident reviewed for labs, resulting in the potential for delayed treatment. Findings include: On 7/23/24 at 11:24 AM, a review of R81's physician's orders was conducted and revealed the following: An order dated 5/2/24 for a urinalysis and urine culture and sensitivity lab with a discontinuation date of 5/15/24. An order dated 5/8/24 for a urinalysis and urine culture and sensitivity lab with a discontinuation date of 5/15/24. An order dated 5/13/24 for a urinalysis and urine culture and sensitivity lab with a completed date of 5/14/24. A review of R81's lab results in the record did not reveal any results for the lab ordered 5/2/24. A review of R81's progress notes was conducted and did not reveal any information regarding the lab ordered on 5/2/24. Continued review of the notes revealed the following: A note dated 5/8/24 at 3:54 PM that read, .Resident complained of burning on urination and urinary frequency . NP (Nurse Practitioner) .notified. Order…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    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 two residents (R26 and R178) of four residents reviewed for medications were assessed for the safe self-administration of medication and to have medication kept at the bedside. Findings include: 08/22/23 at approximately 10:06 a.m., R26 was observed in their room, up in their bed. R26 was observed to have two bottles of eye drops and a cup full of cough drops on their bedside table. R26 was queried if they were using the eye drops and taking the cough drops and they reported that they were and that their eyes get dry in the facility along with their cough. R26 was queried if the facility Nursing staff knew they had the medications at the bedside and they reported that they did and they they have had them for a few weeks. On 8/22/23 at approximately 3:20 p.m., R26 was observed in their room, up in their bed. R26 was still observed to have a cup full of cough drops on their beside table along with the eye drops located in a tissue…

    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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor 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 a competency assessment was completed for one (R27) of five residents reviewed for advance directives, resulting in the facility to have allowed a family member to have signed medical consents and make health care decisions for R27 without the resident to have been deemed incompetent to make decisions regarding their care. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed a family member of R27 had signed multiple medical consents and was allowed to make health care decisions for R27. Further review of the medical record revealed patient advocate papers on file, however no competency assessment was identified in the medical record. This indicated the patient advocate was signing consents and making decisions for R27 without the resident being deemed as incompetent to make their own decisions. Review of the medical record revealed R27 was readmitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included: chronic pain 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · 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

    Based on observation, interview, and record reviews the facility failed to notify the physician of change of a resident's skin condition (R63), ensure a physician order was implemented for a treatment and proper storage of ointments for two (R's 43 & 63) of four residents reviewed for medications stored at the bedside. Findings include: R63 On 8/22/23 at 8:59 AM, R63 was observed sitting in their wheelchair next to their bed. An interview was conducted with the resident at that time. Observed on R63's nightstand was a medication cup filled with a thick ointment, placed behind a greeting card. When asked, R63 stated the staff applies it to their buttock area. At that time the assigned Infection Control Nurse (ICN) D (who was assigned to work the floor on the day of the observation) was asked to verify the medication in comparison with the resident's medication profile. The medication profile was reviewed with ICN D and revealed the resident did not have an order for an ointment to be applied to the resident. ICN D was asked to inform the surveyor of the next assistance 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 · D2023-08-24 · tag F0694 — isolated
    Provide for the safe, appropriate administration of IV fluids for a resident when needed.
    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 appropriately prepare a PICC (peripherally inserted central catheter, used for infusion of intravenous fluids or medications) line prior to intravenous administration of antibiotics for one resident (R26) of one resident reviewed for PICC lines, resulting in the potential for infection. Findings include: On 8/23/23 at 9:34 AM, Nurse 'A' was observed preparing medications for administration to R26. Nurse 'A' prepared multiple medications including an intravenous (IV) antibiotic. Nurse 'A' entered the room, connected the IV tubing to the antibiotic bag and hung the bag on the IV pole. Nurse 'A' was then observed to flush R26's PICC line with 10 milliliters of normal saline. Nurse 'A' was not observed to scrub the PICC line connection port prior to flushing the line. After flushing the line, Nurse 'A' connected the IV tubing and began the infusion of the medication. On 8/23/23 at 9:49 AM, Nurse 'A' was asked about the process for preparing a PICC line for intravenous medication administration and admitted they…

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

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-08-24 · 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 for one resident, (R26) of four residents reviewed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 9.09%. findings include: On 8/23/23 8:21 AM, Nurse 'A' was observed preparing R26's morning medications. Nurse 'A' prepared multiple medications including a Flonase (allergy treatment) nasal spray. After preparing the medications, Nurse 'A' entered R26's room and was observed to assist R26 with the nasal spray. Nurse 'A' administered one spray of the Flonase into R26's right nostril and one spray into their left nostril. At the conclusion of the medication administration, Nurse 'A' exited the room. Nurse 'A' was asked to confirm all of R26's medications due during the morning medication pass were given, and they said they were. On 8/23/23 at 10:24 AM, R26's physician's orders were reconciled (compared) with the observation of the medication administration at 8:21 AM. During the reconciliation it was discovered R26's order for Flonase…

    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

“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

$15,593 in federal fines across 1 penalty.

  • $15,593 — penalty dated 2023-08-24

Dates are the dates CMS records the penalty, not the date of the conduct behind it. CMS publishes penalties on a rolling window, so this is what is currently on the public file — not the home’s lifetime history, and an older fine may attach to a problem that has since been corrected. The amounts are as imposed: the CMS file does not record whether a penalty was appealed, reduced, or paid, so we don’t say. Ask the home what each one was for and what changed since.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleSince
AZIZ, NADAIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/02/2025
MCGEE, MAUREENIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEE; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/02/2025
ASDELL, ERINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2023
BACHMAN, JANICEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2013
BOAL, JAMESIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2024
GIFFORD, LINDAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 10/13/2014
HOLDEN, MARGARETIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2023
LEFEVRE, MICHAELIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
MANUSZAK, JOSEPHIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/16/2021
MARTIN, PEGGYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2021
NOONE, JOHNIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 04/30/2017
PROPSON, PAULIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 11/01/2023
ACHO, RICHARDIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/03/2025
MENDELSON, BARBARAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 09/20/2011
TWOHILL, PATRICIAIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 08/05/2015
DOMINICAN SISTERS OF PEACE INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/02/2025

CMS files one row per role, so the 20 rows in the source record cover these 16 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted. The source lists no ownership percentage for any of them — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.

1 organizational owner 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.

$10.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-1.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$50K
Related-party expense0% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 56%Medicare 13%Other / private 30%

This home reported $50K paid to related parties (affiliated landlords or management companies) in its most recent cost report.

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

$437per resident / day
operating cost
$13,270per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$430per 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 235252. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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