The Gilbert Residence
203 S Huron Street, Ypsilanti, MI 48197 · Non profit - Corporation · 32 certified beds · (734) 482-9498 Medicaid only — no Medicare
This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (4/5)
- it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0604, F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
- a high number of inspection citations overall (18) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
- its facility-reported quality-measure rating is low (1/5)
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 4 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 1 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.
Quality measures — how residents actually fare
| Overall quality measures | 1 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 1 of 5 |
Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.
Trend — is this home getting better or worse?
Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 4 to 3 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.
Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 18.9% | 10.8% | 15.4% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.5% | 5.4% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 9.9% | 0.8% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 4.2% | 1.5% | 2.0% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 0.0% | 4.3% | 6.5% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.1% | 0.1% | better |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.0% | 3.0% | 3.3% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 21.9% | 12.0% | 16.1% | worse |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 13.0% | 19.4% | 18.9% | better |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 96.8% | 95.0% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 3.4% | 5.1% | 4.7% | better |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 13.4% | 20.0% | 21.2% | better |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 25.5% | 14.8% | 17.1% | worse |
* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.
§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.
CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 32 beds and averages 30.0 residents a day — about 94% occupied, or roughly 2 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 3.72 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 2.39 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 3.45 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.82 on weekdays — 10% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 0.95 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 54% is about the same as the national median of 45%.
Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.
Inspection trend
Deficiencies are 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.
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.
18 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 8 are one tap away and print in full.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2025-10-07 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prepare food in accordance with professional standards for food service safety. This deficient practice has the potential to result in food borne illness among all residents that consume food in the kitchen. Findings include: On 10/06/2025 at 09:00 a.m. during an initial tour of food services was conducted with Certified Dietary Manager (CDM) “E”, the following items were observed: Cooler was observed to have red substance on the back wall and on the floor-CDM “E” explained that it was possibly spilt Jello from the weekend. Freezer was observed to have two individual containers of ice cream on the floor. Dry storage was observed to have particles on the floor which CDM “E' explained that it was possibly spilt oatmeal. The top of the enclosed stove appeared to be soiled with food particles and dust. Inside of the same stove appeared soiled with multiple layers of burn on food. End of the dish counter appeared soiled with multiple layers of old food and the back of the splash wall was observed to have black…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-10-07 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure accurate advance directive (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time) information was in place for two residents (#7 and 33) of two residents reviewed for advance directives from a total sample of 9 residents. Resident #7 Review of the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed Resident #7 (R7) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnosis that included vascular dementia and hypertension. The MDS revealed R7 had long and short-term memory impairment and severely impaired decision-making skills. A statement of decision-making capacity, signed by the Physician on 7/30/25 and signed by a psychologist on 7/22/25 revealed R7 was unable to fully participate in medical treatment decisions due to vascular dementia. Further review of R7's medical record reflected R7's Durable Power of Attorney (DPOA) signed an advanced directive for Do Not resuscitate (DNR),…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2025-10-07 · tag F0760 — failed to prevent significant medication errors — isolatedEnsure that residents are free from significant medication errors.
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 that residents were free from significant medication errors for one resident (#28) of four residents reviewed during medication administration. Findings Included:Resident #28 (R38)Review of the medical record revealed R28 was admitted to the facility 09/23/2025 with diagnoses that included atrial fibrillation, hyperlipidemia, sleep apnea, congestive heart failure (CHF), hypertension, muscle wasting, ischemic cardiomyopathy (damage of heart muscle), gastro-esophageal reflux disease, anxiety, and cerebral infarction (CVA). The most recent Minimum Date Set (MDS), with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 09/23/2025, revealed R28 had Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) of 15 (cognitively intact) out of 15. On 10/07/2025 at 08:56 a.m. Registered Nurse (RN) D was observed preparing medication to provide to R28. R28 was observed sitting at a dining room table. RN D provided six medications to R28 who then was observed to orally consume the six medications. One of the medications observed to be provided…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-10-24 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to: (1) effectively clean food service equipment (toaster), (2) ensure proper sanitizer concentration within the 3-compartment sink, and (3) effectively date mark all potentially hazardous ready-to-eat food products effecting 30 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, improper three-compartment sink sanitization, and resident foodborne illness. Findings include: On 10/22/24 at 09:45 A.M., An initial tour of the food service was conducted with Dietary Manager E. The following items were noted: One gallon of Country Fresh 2% milk (3/4 full) was observed within the 2-door reach-in cooler, without an effective discard date. The manufacturer's best-by-date was also observed to read 10-26-24. Dietary Manager E stated: Staff should have placed a discard date on the container. The 2017 FDA Model Food Code section 3-501.17 states: (A) Except when PACKAGING FOOD using a REDUCED OXYGEN PACKAGING method as specified under § 3-502.12, and except as specified in (E)…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0604 — failed to not use physical restraints improperly — isolatedEnsure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.
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 perform ongoing re-evaluation of the need for a restraint for one (Resident #25) of one reviewed. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #25 (R25) admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included major depressive disorder, epilepsy, Parkinson's Disease, and dementia. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/28/24 revealed R25 was severely cognitively impaired and had a restraint that was used daily. An observation on 10/23/24 at 10:37 AM revealed R25 was asleep, seated in a Broda chair (a wheelchair that provides supportive positioning through a combination of tilt, recline, adjustable leg rest angle, wings with shoulder bolsters and height adjustable arms) in their room. R25 had an air mattress on their bed. The right side of the bed was against the wall. Bolsters, approximately six inches high, were observed on both sides of the bed and ran the full length of the…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolatedEnsure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure their medication error rate was below 5% when four medication errors were observed from a total of 26 opportunities for three residents (Resident #2, Resident #3, and Resident #7) of six reviewed resulting in a medication error rate of 15.38%. Resident #3 (R3) Review of the medical record revealed R3 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included dementia and seizures. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/7/24 revealed R3 was severely cognitively impaired. Review of the Physician's Order dated 5/7/18 revealed an order for topiramate 25 milligrams (mg) two tablets twice a day. The order did not specify that the medication could be crushed. Review of the Physician's Order dated 7/13/22 revealed an order for levetiracetam solution 100 milligrams/milliliters (mg/mL); administer 1250 mg/12.5 mL twice a day. On 10/22/24 at 10:18 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D was observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-10-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to offer an updated pneumococcal vaccine for one (Resident #2) of five reviewed. Findings include: Review of the medical record revealed Resident #2 (R2) admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Parkinson's Disease, depression, and hypertension. The Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/30/24 revealed R2 scored 14 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) and was up to date on the pneumococcal vaccine. Review of R2's vaccine history revealed R2 received a PCV13 pneumococcal vaccine on 7/22/16. R2 did not have documentation of any further pneumococcal vaccines. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) PneumoRecs VaxAdviser application, the recommendation for R2 was give one dose of PCV20 or PPSV23 at least 1 year after PCV13. Regardless of which vaccine is used (PCV20 or PPSV23), their pneumococcal vaccinations are…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Fcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespreadProcure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain food service equipment effecting 29 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination and bacterial harborage. Findings include: On 09/25/23 at 02:30 P.M., An initial tour of the food service was conducted with Director of Food Services C. The following items were noted: The interior and exterior surfaces of the South Bend convection ovens were observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The exterior surfaces of the South Bend stove/ovens were observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The Proctor Silex commercial toaster was observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The General Electric microwave oven interior and exterior surfaces were observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The meat slicer was observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The can opener assembly was observed soiled with accumulated and encrusted food residue. The spice rack shelves were observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · E2023-09-28 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — patternEnsure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the physician reviewed and acted upon identified medication regimen irregularities for four (Residents #'s 8, 13, 15 and 16) of five reviewed for unnecessary medications, resulting in the potential for unnecessary medications and adverse reactions. Findings include: Resident #15 According to the clinical record, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] resident 15 (R15) was admitted to the facility with diagnoses that included diabetes, heart failure , and depression. R15 scored 14 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on Brief Interview Mental Status (BIMS). Further review of both the facility's electronic medical record and hard copy medical record for R15 did not reflect any monthly reviews by a pharmacist. On 09/27/28 at 11:00 am evidence that R15 had a monthly medication management review was completed by a Pharmacist, along with any indication of irregularities and physician recommendation reports were requested. What was received was…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure accurate completion of advance directive information for one (Resident #24) of one resident reviewed for advance directives (legal documents that allow a person to identify decisions about end-of-life care ahead of time) resulting in the potential for a resident's preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility. Findings include: Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #24 (R24) was admitted to facility 9/7/2023 with diagnoses including unspecified dementia. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/8/23 reflected that R24 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 00 (severe cognitive impairment). In an observation and interview on 9/25/23 at 3:36 PM, R24 was observed sitting in wheelchair, in front yard of building, with daughter sitting at side. R24 was noted to be alert, watching passing by traffic, nodded head yes when questioned if he was enjoying the day, but otherwise did not respond to…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
Show the remaining 8 citations
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolatedTimely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation pertains to Intake number MI00134805. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to immediately report to the State Agency an injury of unknown origin of one resident (Resident #30) of 1 reviewed for abuse, resulting in the potential of abuse to go unreported, undetected and the potential for further abuse to continue and go unrecognized. Findings include: Resident #30 (R30) During an interview on [DATE] at 08:05 AM, Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) D stated that on [DATE] on the afternoon shift, R30 went to the shower room with 2 Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs), CNA E and CNA F. LPN D said she noticed R30 had bruising on her arm later that evening. LPN D said that R30 was swatting at the CNA E and CNA F. LPN D was unsure of how the bruises occurred, but she noted them. Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R30 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses of visual and auditory hallucinations, dementia, and depression. Brief Interview for…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
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 complete a significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment for one (Resident #29) of 12 reviewed for MDS assessments, from a total sample of 12, resulting in the potential for inaccurate care plans and unmet care needs. Findings include: Resident #29 (R29) Review of the medical record revealed Resident #29 (R29) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included inflammation of the vagina and vulva, Multiple Sclerosis (a disease in which the immune system eats away the protective covering of the nerves), history of falls and wheelchair bound. R29 is dependent of repositioning in bed and all cares. According to Resident #29 (R29)'s Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed R29 scored 03 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a cognitive screening tool) and had no behaviors. Record review revealed R29 was receiving hospice services through said hospice agency…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolatedDevelop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement person center care plans for 2 residents (#1 and #16) of 12 residents reviewed for care plans, resulting in the potential for unmet needs. Findings include: According to the clinical record, Resident 1 (R1) was admitted to the facility in 2019 with diagnose that included heart failure and diabetes. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] reflected R1 scored 15 out of 15 (cognitively intact) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS). Review of an occupational therapy evaluation dated 09/15/23 reflected R1 could benefit for a lap tray during meals in order to allow for self feeding and improved body mechanics. Review of R1's care plans did not include or identify the use of a full lap tray. On 09/26/23 at 02:34 PM, R1 was observed sitting in wheelchair in room has full lap tray attached to the wheelchair which R1 kept many personal items, (phone, tissue candies). On 09/27/23 at 08:53 AM, R1 was observed…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolatedProvide 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 that pressure wounds were assessed, monitored and treated according to acceptable professional standards for one resident (#26) out of two reviewed with pressure ulcers resulting in the potential for worsening of pressure ulcers and delayed healing. Findings include: Resident #26 (R26) Medical record revealed Resident #26 (R26) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Pressure Ulcer on left buttock, right femur fracture, history of Falls, muscle weakness, dementia, right hip pain, trochanteric fracture of the right femur. According to R26's Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed R26 scored 99 out of 15 (unable to answer any questions) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a cognitive screening tool) and had no behaviors. R26 requires assistance with activities of daily living and ambulation. During an interview on 09/27/23 at 08:38 AM, DON stated the sacral pressure ulcer is now healed and…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to properly transfer one Resident (#8) of 2 reviewed for falls, resulting in a fall, facial injuries, and need for emergency room transfer. Findings include: Review of the medical record reflected that Resident #8 (R8) was admitted to facility 9/10/2020 with diagnoses including unspecified dementia with behavioral disturbance, polyosteoarthritis, essential hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) with an Assessment Reference Date (ARD) of 9/11/23 reflected that R8 had a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS-a cognitive screening tool) score of 4 (severe cognitive impairment). Section G of the same MDS reflected that R8 required one-person extensive assist with bed mobility and transfers, one-person limited assist with toilet use, and was independent with eating after set-up. In an observation and interview on 9/25/23 at 3:10 PM, R8 was observed sitting in nursing day room in tan leather recliner chair…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0730 — isolatedObserve each nurse aide's job performance and give regular training.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete an annual performance review and provide education based on the review for one staff member, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) F of 1 reviewed for yearly performance evaluation. This could potentially put all residents at risk for poor quality of care. Finding include: Review of the Nurse Aide Training Program Policy with a Reviewed/Revised Date of 7/25/2023 under Policy Explanation and Compliance Guidelines step 2 revealed Each nurse aide shall be provided at least 12 hours of in-service training annually, based on his/her employment date, not calendar year. Under Step 5, Additional training will be provided to each nurse aide based on any areas of weakness as determined in the nurse aide's performance reviews. a. The Director of Nursing shall communicate the educational needs of the employee to the Staff Development Coordinator upon final review of the annual performance appraisal. b. Education that is needed based on the performance appraisal will be completed within 90 days of the appraisal, unless otherwise…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2023-09-28 · tag F0849 — isolatedArrange for the provision of hospice services or assist the resident in transferring to a facility that will arrange for the provision of hospice 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 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to integrate hospice and facility services and care plans to coordinate hospice care for one Resident (#29) of two resident reviewed for hospice services. This deficient practice resulted in the potential for care not being provided and lack of continuity of care between hospice staff and the facility. Findings include: Resident #29 (R29) Review of the medical record revealed Resident #29 (R29) was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and admitted to hospice on 07/25/23 with diagnoses that included inflammation of the vagina and vulva, Multiple Sclerosis (a disease in which the immune system eats away the protective covering of the nerves), history of falls and wheelchair bound. R29 is dependent of repositioning in bed and all cares. According to Resident #29 (R29)'s Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], revealed R29 scored 03 out of 15 (severe cognitive impairment) on the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS- a cognitive screening tool) and had no…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- No harm found · C2023-09-28 · tag F0577 — widespreadAllow residents to easily view the nursing home's survey results and communicate with advocate agencies.
What the surveyor found here — the official record, unedited, may be distressing
Based on observations and interviews, the facility failed to ensure the results of the most recent federal surveys and corresponding plans of correction were readily accessible to all residents and representatives in the facility, with a census of 29 residents, resulting in the residents and representatives not being informed of identified deficiencies and solutions as written in the plan of correction. Findings include: On 09/27/23 at 11:25 AM, observed survey book to be on the counter at the nurse's station. It was between other facility binders (Fire Alarm Protocol, Extreme Weather, Ancillary PBJ (Payroll Based Journal) hours, Sign Out Book, and Resident Concerns) and wasn't easily accessible. Upon review of the survey book on 09/27/23 at 11:25 AM, it was found that the most recent survey was the recertification survey dated 05/12/2021. During an interview on 09/27/23 at 11:35 AM, Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) was asked who was responsible for updating the survey book. NHA stated that with the Director of Nursing change, updating the survey book fell through the cracks.
“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.
- Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
- Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
- State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Since |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
The source lists no ownership percentage for any party here — PECOS records a share only for equity interests, not for board or management roles.
What families pay in MI
CMS lists this home as Medicaid-certified only — it can accept Medicaid for long-term care, but it is not Medicare-certified, so Medicare will not pay for a short rehabilitation (“skilled nursing”) stay here. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Michigan Medicaid page.
Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.
Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 23E104. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-10-07, 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.