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

Medilodge of Wyoming

2786 56 Street, SW, Wyoming, MI 49418 · For profit - Corporation · 80 certified beds · (616) 261-3960 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (616) 261-3960 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
No harm-level citations or fines — but 10 lower-level deficiencies on record (see below)
Insights

On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.

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)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)

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 3 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★ 4/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
3380 44th St SW · (616) 685-8250 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3960 44th St SW · (616) 530-4590 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
3960 44Th St SW
Park
Chicago Dr Across From Barrett, 3809 Chicago Dr SW · (616) 538-1990 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3715 Wilson Ave SW · (616) 538-9350

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 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 4 to 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 increased8.1%10.8%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight7.4%5.4%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%0.8%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.1%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 injury1.3%3.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened2.6%12.0%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.3%19.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%95.0%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.6%5.1%4.7%typical
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control30.1%20.0%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table14.9%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 vaccine61.6%79.5%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission23.0%24.0%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit26.4%11.7%12.0%worse
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.831.841.67typical
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days3.161.641.80worse

* 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.

46.8% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 44 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

46.8%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
10.2%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
54.2%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.45U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.18hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.20hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 54.2% 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 24 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.45 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 75% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 13% 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 SNF46.8%CMS range 33.3–61.451.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF10.2%CMS range 6.3–15.510.7%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 discharge54.2%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 discharge54.2%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 discharge50.0%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 identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot 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 dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%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 worsened5.6%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 hospitalizationnot 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 SNFs1.171.02Oct 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

0.73
RN hours/ resident / day
0.70
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.38
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.81
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.45
RN hoursweekends
46.2%
Total nursing turnover
33.3%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 80 beds and averages 75.8 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 4 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 3.81 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.73 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.38 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 3.35 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.00 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.85 to 0.45 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 46% is about the same as the national median of 45%.

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

Inspection trend

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2025-07-24)
3
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-22)

Deficiencies are unchanged from the previous inspection. 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.

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

  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to obtain informed consent and offer information about formulating an Advanced Directive for 1 resident (R82) out of 5 residents reviewed for Advanced Directives. Findings include: Review of an admission Record reflected R82 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included encephalopathy (a brain disease that can appear as confusion, memory loss, personality changes and/or coma), cognitive communication deficit, mild cognitive impairment, major depression, and generalized anxiety disorder. Review of a form Advanced Directives Acknowledgements/CPR (Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation) Consent reflected what CPR is; Acknowledgments, including spaces after each statement for initials to indicate understanding,I have been informed of my rights and all rules and regulations regarding decisions regarding medical care; I have been fully informed of my options when choosing CPR or Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) services; I understand I have the right to alter…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure 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 observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician reviewed monthly drug regimen review recommendations for 1 resident (R70) of 5 residents reviewed for unnecessary medication. Findings include:Review of an admission Record revealed R70 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included hypertension and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD).Review of R70's drug regimen review Physician Recommendations dated 6/14/2025 revealed .This resident is receiving famotidine 20mg BID (twice daily) for GERD since 03/2023. Please evaluate for continued need/reduction. There was no indication that the physician had reviewed this recommendation.Review of R70's Physician's Orders on 7/14/2025 at 11:14 AM revealed an active order for famotidine 20mg to be taken by mouth twice a day. Further review of the electronic medical record revealed no documentation that the physician had reviewed the drug regimen review Physician Recommendations dated 6/14/2025.In 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.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2025-07-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain proper infection control practices for one of two Residents (R69) observed during clinical care activities. Findings include:Resident #69 (R69)On 7/23/25 at approximately 9:41 AM, RN C administered a prescribed nasal spray to R69. RN C prepared to give R69 their insulin injection via pen in the abdomen by cleansing the area with alcohol swab. RN C then waved her hand back and forth over the area swabbed by alcohol to get it dried prior to administering the insulin injection. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) 2020, injections are unsafe when administered with unsterile or improper techniques. The WHO recommends swabbing the injection site for 30 seconds and allowing the area to dry for 30 seconds. RN C waving their hand over the alcohol causes it to evaporate too quickly, disrupting the alcohol's action, while potentially introducing new microorganisms. RN C's actions can increase the risk for infection at the injection site. Upon return to the medication cart, RN C did not cleanse the nasal applicator…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0561 — failed to honor residents' choices — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to and the facility must promote and facilitate resident self-determination through support of resident choice.
    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 honor resident choices and preferences based on the individualized plan of care for 1 resident (Resident #40) out of 16 residents reviewed for self-determination. Findings: Resident #40 (R40) Review of an admission Record reflected R40 admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, repeated falls, chronic post-traumatic stress disorder PTSD), dependence on enabling machines and devices and anxiety. Review of a quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] reflects R40 is cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment score of 13/15. Review of a Care Plan initiated on 7/20/2023 reflected R40 required assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) related to his diagnoses. Interventions included: Transfers: 2 person assist with Hoyer (mechanical) lift (added to the care plan on 6/14/2024); I like to sit up in my recliner…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolated
    Ensure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards regarding medication administration for 1 of 6 residents (Resident #57), reviewed for professional standards. Findings: Resident #57 (R57) Review of an admission Record revealed R57 was a [AGE] year-old male, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses of stroke, legal blindness, repeated falls, and anxiety disorder. During an observation on 08/21/24 at 10:15 AM, R57 laid in bed resting with his eyes open and a small plastic cup containing multiple pills sat on the overbed table. R57 stated that sometimes the nurse would leave his morning medications for him to take when he wakes up. R57 also reported that he does not take his medications independently, nor store any of his medications in his room. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) for R57 revealed there was not an assessment nor a physician order for R57 to self-administer medications. During an interview on 08/23/24 at…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-08-22 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate skin assessments and timely responses to skin changes for 2 of 16 residents, (Resident #22 and Resident #54) reviewed for impaired skin. The deficient practice resulted in no follow-up assessments and treatment orders for identified skin conditions. Findings include: Resident #54 (R54) Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R54 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis of (but not limited to) stoke, chronic pain syndrome, and heart failure. Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) reflected a score of 12 out of 15 which represented R54 was cognitively intact. During an interview and observation on 8/20/24 at approximately 3:53 PM, R54 was asked if she had any wounds the staff was monitoring and R54 stated she had no wound dressings. R54 stated that she was told she needed surgery for a skin issue on her right breast. R54 pulled her shirt up and showed this Surveyor a darked,…

    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 · E2023-07-27 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to treat residents with dignity and respect and failed to provide an environment that promoted and enhanced resident quality of life for 1 resident (Resident #3) and residents attending monthly group meetings, reviewed for dignity, resulting in the potential for feelings of frustration, depression, and loss of self-worth and an overall deterioration of psychological well-being. Findings: Resident #3 (R3) Review of an admission Record revealed R was an [AGE] year-old female, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: multiple sclerosis. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for R3, with a reference date of 5/8/23 revealed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15, out of a total possible score of 15, which indicated R3 was cognitively intact. During an interview on 07/25/23 at 12:15 PM, R3 reported that she felt it was disrespectful when the facility nursing staff wore earbuds while 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.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-27 · tag F0558 — failed to accommodate residents' needs and preferences — isolated
    Reasonably 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 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility to failed to ensure call lights were in reach and answered promptly for 3 residents (Resident #224, #8, and #63), reviewed for accommodation of needs, resulting in the potential for residents to not meet their highest practicable level of well-being. Findings include: Resident #224 (R224) Review of an admission Record revealed R224 was a [AGE] year-old male, originally admitted to the facility on [DATE], with pertinent diagnoses which included: stroke and aphasia (difficulty speaking). R224 was able to make needs known but had difficulty speaking. During an observation and interview on 07/25/23 at 09:40 AM, R224's call light was on and he reported he had been waiting for assistance for over an hour. R224 pointed to his wheelchair and indicated he was waiting to be assisted out of bed. Review of the call light system located at the nurses station revealed R224's call light had been activated at 9:32 AM. At 9:48 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA)…

    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 · D2023-07-27 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were kept safe from accidents and hazards for 1 residents (Resident #8) when staff failed to maintain NPO (nothing by mouth) status, resulting in the potential for harm from complications related to the resident's inability to swallow safely. Findings: Resident #8 (R8) Review of an admission Record reflected R8 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses of blindness of one eye, osteoarthritis, muscle weakness, need for assistance with personal care, gastrostomy status (feeding tube), low back pain and depression. Review of the admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] reflected R8 was cognitively intact as evidenced by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14/15 and needed extensive assistance from one person for dressing, toileting and bathing. Review of a Speech Therapy SLP Evaluation and Plan of Treatment for certification period 6/30/2023 - 7/29/2023 reflected R8'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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-27 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure systems were implemented to accurately account for controlled substances when licensed nurses were not conducting/signing off on shift to shift narcotic reconciliation and licensed nurses were not signing out controlled substances from narcotic sheets prior to administration of the controlled substances, resulting in the potential for the inability to reconcile narcotics and diversion. Findings: Review of a facility policy Controlled Substance Administration & Accountability reviewed/revised on 1/1/2022 reflected It is the policy of this facility to promote safe, high quality patient, care, compliant with state and federal regulations regarding monitoring the use of controlled substances. The facility will have safeguards in place in order to prevent loss, diversion or accidental exposure. The policy specified 8. The Charge Nurse on duty will maintain the keys to the controlled substance containers. The keys to this container should not be shared with other staff, including licensed staff without first…

    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
Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to MEDILODGE — 53 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 5 of 53.1+1.9 vs chain
Health inspection 5 of 52.7+2.3 vs chain
Staffing 4 of 53.7+0.3 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
The other 52 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.1★, per CMS)
1 of 5Medilodge of FarmingtonFarmington, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand BlancGrand Blanc, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Grand RapidsGrand Rapids, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of HowellHowell, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MarshallMarshall, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Montrose IncMontrose, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of MunisingMunising, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of Sault Ste. MarieSault Ste. Marie, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of SouthfieldSouthfield, MI 1 of 5Medilodge of WestwoodKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge at the ShoreGrand Haven, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Capital AreaLansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of CheboyganCheboygan, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of East LansingEast Lansing, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of FrankenmuthFrankenmuth, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of GTCTraverse City, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of KalamazooKalamazoo, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of LudingtonLudington, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of St. ClairEast China, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of Sterling HeightsSterling Heights, MI 2 of 5Medilodge of West BloomfieldWest Bloomfield, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Campus AreaEast Lansing, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of HillmanHillman, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivingstonHowell, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of LivoniaLivonia, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Mt. PleasantMt. Pleasant, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of PortagePortage, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ShorelineSterling Heights, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of Tawas CityTawas City, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of TaylorTaylor, MI 3 of 5Medilodge of ZeelandZeeland, MI 3 of 5The Lodge at TaylorTaylor, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of GaylordGaylord, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of HollandHolland, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LansingLansing, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of LeelanauSuttons Bay, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of MilfordMilford, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of OkemosOkemos, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of RichmondRichmond, MI 4 of 5Medilodge of Traverse CityTraverse City, MI

Showing 40 of 52; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
ARK OPCO GROUP, LLCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 07/01/2015
B&Y HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 07/01/2015
B&Y TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 07/01/2015
CODY HEALTHCARE S CORPOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 07/01/2015
CRAIG FLASHNER 2007 TRUSTOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTERESTNO PERCENTAGE PROVIDEDsince 07/01/2015
NORCROSS, ROBERTIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/01/2015
ROGERS, STACEYIndividualCONTRACTED MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 07/01/2015
KIRK, KRISTINEIndividualW-2 MANAGING EMPLOYEEsince 09/01/2016
FLASHNER, CRAIGIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2015
PERLSTEIN, YITZCHOKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2015
NOBLE HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/01/2015
PRESTIGE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLCOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2016

CMS files one row per role, so the 14 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$9.4M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-3.6%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.2M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 60%Medicare 7%Other / private 33%

This home reported $1.2M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

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

Cost & finances

$356per resident / day
operating cost
$10,819per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$343per 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 235630. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-07-24, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next