1061 West Hackley Avenue, Muskegon, MI 49441 · Muskegon County · (231) 755-2255
107 certified beds, about 81 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1967
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 235004 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on January 14, 2026, inspectors cited 21 health deficiencies (the Michigan average is 9.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 45 health citations since October 2023, 1 was rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents.
CMS lists no fines against this home in the last three years.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.21 hours per resident per day, against 3.99 across Michigan and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.65 of those hours.
51.4% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Michigan average 44.1%).
CMS links it to Optalis Health & Rehabilitation, an affiliated group of 36 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 45 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteThis citation refers to Intake 3012437. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent a fall with injury for 1 of 3 residents (R2) reviewed for accident hazards, resulting in R2 sustaining a fractured nasal bone and lacerations to the face.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain best practices in the food service area resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen in a current facility census of 87 residents. Findings Include:On 01/12/2026 at 9:27AM, observation in Dining room [ROOM NUMBER], the drain line for the ice machine was not air gapped, the flexible line from ice machine was sitting with the end sitting directly in the drain. On 01/12/2026 at 3:07PM, during interview with Maintenance Manager (MM) R it was found that MM R was not aware the drain line was not properly air gapped. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement Infection Prevention and Control Policies and Procedures and have an active and ongoing plan for reducing the risk of legionella and other opportunistic pathogens of premise plumbing (OPPP), resulting in the potential for increased risk of respiratory and other infections among all residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to develop and/or implement Comprehensive Care Plans for 4 residents (R23, R25, R54 and R90) out of 19 residents reviewed for care planning. R90 Review of an admission Record reflected R90 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS), unspecified dementia, and an unspecified lack of expected normal physiological development in childhood. Review of an admission assessment dated [DATE] reflected R90 admitted to the facility with a right heel blister measuring 1.0 cm (centimeters) x 1.2 cm without any depth. Review of a Braden Scale-For predicting Pressure Ulcer Risk Evaluation dated 1/8/2026 reflected R90 was at risk for pressure ulcers. Review of a Care Plan initiated on 1/8/2026 reflected Resident (R90) has actual skin breakdown in the following locations: [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record reviews, the facility failed to staff the 400 & 500 Hallways to meet the acuity and psychosocial needs of 25 residents including R6 and R70.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for 3 Residents (R3, R23 and R25) of 19 Residents sampled.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, and interview, the facility failed to maintain general cleanliness and repair of the premises affecting occupants of halls 100, 200 and 400.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for all residents for at least 3 of 5 residents (R19, R79 and R94) in a dining/activity room out of 19 residents reviewed for Resident Rights. During an observation of the noon meal in the dining/activity room on 1/12/2026 at 12:10 PM, R79 and her husband were complaining about being served cabbage too frequently. R79 received cabbage soup with her meal and at approximately 12:20 PM. R79 and her husband were asked if she would have preferred the tomato soup. They responded, yes. When asked if they wanted staff to get tomato soup, they responded they have to make meal choices before 10:00 AM for the lunch meal. They said they have been told no in the past when asking for substitutions. Several staff were in the area and did not respond to providing the alternate soup choice. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to follow its concern/grievance process and address family and resident concerns for 1 resident (R19) out of 19 residents reviewed for Resident Rights.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to address Pre-admission Screening/Annual Resident Review (PASARR) in a timely manner for 2 Resident's (R11 & R12) out of 19 resulting in them being completed late.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to complete a baseline care plan within 48 hours of admission for 2 Residents (R23 and R25) of 2 residents reviewed for baseline care plans.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor care to potentially prevent sepsis/hospitalization for one (R1) and failed to assess and monitor moisture associated skin damage (MASD) for one (R4) of two residents reviewed for quality of care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide care and services according to professional standards to prevent the development and/or worsening of pressure injuries for 3 residents (R23, R54 and R90) out of 5 residents reviewed for pressure injuries. R23 Review of R23's admission record dated 1/13/26 revealed she was a [AGE] year-old female admitted to the facility on [DATE] and had diagnoses that included: Pressure-induced deep tissue damage of sacral region, Alzheimer's disease, and muscle wasting. R23 was not her own responsible party. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper positioning/support for one (R56) of 3 residents reviewed for positioning.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to prevent falls for 1 (R1) of 2 residents reviewed for falls, and unsafe self-administration of medications left at the bedside for 2 (R13 and R27), of 2 residents observed with medications at the bedside.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure ordered supplements were provided to one resident with significant weight loss (R19) out of 2 residents reviewed for nutrition and hydration. Review of an admission Record reflected R19 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with diagnoses that included severe protein-calorie malnutrition, nutritional deficiency, unspecified and dysphagia (difficulty swallowing). Review of a Care Plan initiated 7/25/2025 reflected R19 was at risk for repeated alteration in skin integrity related to . poor nutritional intake due to dysphagia. An intervention for this focus area of the care plan was to provide diet and supplements per physician order. The Care Plan also indicated R19 required assistance with ADLs (activities for daily living) that included needing set up assistance for eating. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to assess and monitor ongoing irritation and drainage of a PEG tube (Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy tube) insertion site for one (R20) of 2 residents reviewed for tube feedings.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to assess, monitor and treat 1 Resident's (R25) respiratory condition of 1 Resident reviewed for respiratory care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to coordinate care consistent with the professional standards of practice by assessing and monitoring pre and post dialysis treatments, communicating and collaborating with the dialysis facility regarding care and medication reconciliation for one (R56) of 3 residents reviewed for dialysis.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to offer and provide Influenza and Pneumococcal Immunizations to 1 Resident (R54) of 5 Residents sampled for Immunizations.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to offer and provide a COVID-19 Vaccination to 1 Resident (R54) of 5 Residents sampled for COVID-19 Vaccinations. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to offer and provide a COVID-19 Vaccination to 1 Resident (R54) of 5 Residents sampled for COVID-19 Vaccinations.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure surveys conducted by Federal or State surveyors and any plan of corrections in effect for the past 3 years was readily accessible to residents, family members and legal representatives of residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to assess to determine if resident was appropriate for lone transfer in accordance with professional standards of care related to mental and physical conditions for one (Resident #1) of three residents reviewed for quality of care.
Inspectors wroteThis citation is related to intake # MI00147858 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards and ensure 1 out of 3 residents (Resident #400) received a physician ordered medication to treat an infection and failed to obtain ordered labs and tests required to monitor the efficacy and safety of the medication.
Inspectors wroteBased 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 from the kitchen.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain general cleanliness and repair of the premises. This resulted in an increased potential for contamination and a possible decrease in the satisfaction of living, affecting residents in the 300, 400 and 500 halls.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care in a dignified manner for 2 residents (Resident #57 and Resident #73) out of 18 residents reviewed for quality care.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to A) Develop, implement and evaluate the effectiveness of care planned interventions, B) Complete required assessments and follow-up after a fall, C) Accurately complete Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments, and D) Track incidents and accidents as an aspect of Quality Assurance (QA) for 1 resident (Resident #69) out of 18 residents reviewed for quality care.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess and monitor a wound for 6 weeks for 1 Resident (R28) of 2 residents reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in the potential of R28's pressure ulcer to worsen due to missed assessments.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure licensed staff carried out physician orders according to professional standards for the care of residents who receive enteral feeding for one resident (Resident #73), out of one resident reviewed for tube feeding from a total sample of 18 residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for 2 of 18 sampled residents (R8 and R12), resulting in the potential for providers not having an accurate and complete picture of the resident's stay at the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) according to facility policy for one resident (Resident #73) out of 18 residents reviewed for infection control from a total sample of 18 residents.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to Intake #MI00143516 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure effective hot water sanitization of resident dishes, utensils and facility cookware.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to Intake # MI00145822 Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement the mechanical lift transfer of one Resident (R105) in accordance with the facility policy.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to: 1. Ensure proper storage of food and clean and sanitary supplies; 2. Clean food and non-food contact surfaces to sight and touch; 3. Properly store food product under refrigeration; and 4. Ensure proper instillation of an air gap on food contact equipment. These conditions resulted in an increased risk of contaminated foods and an increased risk of food borne illness that affected 74 residents who consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: 1. During the initial tour of the kitchen, at 8:15 AM on 10/16/23, it was observed that two boxes of shell eggs were found stored on the middle shelf above cartons of milk. When asked if these eggs were appropriately stored, Dietary Manager H stated he will move the eggs to the bottom. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure monthly pharmacy drug regimen review recommendations were reviewed by the physician and/or acted upon in a timely manner for 3 of 5 residents reviewed (R23, R59, and R62), resulting in the potential for the physician not knowing of a pharmacy recommendation, the potential for a delay in implementing a pharmacy recommendation, and the potential for adverse effects from medications that the pharmacy identified as potential medication issues.
Inspectors wroteOn 10/16/23 at 0:23 AM a review was conducted of the 400 Hall medication cart with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) L. Review of the top drawer of the 400 Hall medication cart revealed an in-use undated Humalog Quick pen for Resident #17 (R17). LPN L reported that insulin devices are to be dated when first placed in service. On 10/17/23 at 11:30 AM a review was conducted of the 300 Hall medication cart with LPN B. Review of the top drawer of this medication cart revealed an in-use vial of Lispro insulin for R40. The vial was dated 9/1. LPN B reported that insulin vials are to be dated when opened and are good for twenty-eight or thirty days. Further review of the top drawer of the medication cart revealed a Novolog insulin pen dated 9/15/23 also for R40. A Novolog insulin pen for R33 was observed to be undated. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean, sanitary, and comfortable environment in one soiled utility room (100 Hall), one shower room (200 Hall), one clean utility room (200 Hall), and four resident rooms (room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], room [ROOM NUMBER], and room [ROOM NUMBER]), resulting in an unclean, unsanitary, and uncomfortable environment.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to coordinate with the appropriate, State-designated authority, to ensure that 1 of 2 residents (R33) reviewed received timely follow-up PASSAR II evaluations, resulting in the potential for a delay in care and services appropriate to their needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure fresh water and a call light were accessible for one physically and cognitively impaired Resident (R25) resulting in thirst, inability to request assistance, anxiety, and the potential for all facility residents to not be monitored or assisted with activities of daily living.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an Activities program was implemented to meet the interests and needs for two Residents (R475 and R47) resulting in a lack of life enrichment and the potential for social isolation and boredom for these and all facility residents.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation the facility failed to discard expired tube feeding supplements. These conditions resulted in an increased risk for contaminated foods and an increased risk of food borne illness for individuals who are prescribed these specific supplements.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure oxygen tubing was changed for one Resident (R21) resulting in the potential for infection and failure to follow facility protocol and the potential for all facility residents that use oxygen devices to not have them properly maintained.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate of less than 5% for 2 of 5 residents (R44 and R59) observed for medication administration, resulting in a medication error rate of 6.8% (2 errors from 29 opportunities).
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to maintain complete and accurate medical records for 4 residents (R21, R33, R59, and R62), resulting in incomplete and inaccurate medical records and the potential for providers not having an accurate and complete picture of the resident's stay at the facility.
27 fire safety citations on file: 17 on January 14, 2026, 5 on October 31, 2024, 5 on October 18, 2023.
CMS lists no fines or payment denials against this home in the last three years. The national average is 0.9 fines per home.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Michigan | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 3.21 | 3.99 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.65 | 0.78 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.77 | 3.50 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.92 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.64 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 51.4% | 44.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 50.0% | 39.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.54 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.38 on weekdays and 2.77 on weekends, 18% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 4.9% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.47 in April to June 2025 to 3.21 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.21 | 0.65 | 3.38 | 2.77 | 4.9% | 0 of 90 | 81 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.31 | 0.71 | 3.47 | 2.89 | 2.7% | 0 of 92 | 79 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.09 | 0.57 | 3.21 | 2.78 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 83 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.47 | 0.57 | 3.60 | 3.13 | 0.0% | 0 of 91 | 80 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Michigan, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.95 | 0.70 | 4.14 | 3.45 | 3.3% | 0.4% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Michigan, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $19.03 | $18.35 to $21.59 | 43,290 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $31.47 | $29.83 to $35.52 | 10,880 |
| Registered nurses | $45.34 | $39.46 to $49.74 | 104,950 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Michigan | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 12.4 | 10.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.8 | 3.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.5 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 17.9 | 12.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.3 | 5.1 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.1 | 14.8 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 13.4 | 24.0 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 12.4 | 11.7 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.9 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Optalis Health & Rehabilitation of Muskegon's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (51.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
51.5% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Michigan: 89 better, 22 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 47 eligible stays.
11.1% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Michigan: 0 better, 9 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 70 eligible stays.
7.9% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 7.1% · Michigan: 1 better, 1 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 32 eligible stays.
54.5% this home
Median of homes: Michigan57.6% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 33 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Michigan0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 40 residents counted.
2.8% this home
Median of homes: Michigan1.3% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 40 residents counted.
100.0% this home
Median of homes: Michigan99.5% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 24 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: OPTALIS MUSKEGON OPCO LLC. CMS links this home to Optalis Health & Rehabilitation, a group of 36 nursing homes averaging 2.4 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Om Holdco 7 LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 07/01/2025 |
| Paar 108 LLC | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Pinal R. Patel 2017 Irrevocable Trust F/B/O Aarna R. Patel | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Pinal R. Patel 2017 Irrevocable Trust F/B/O Ansh R. Patel | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Pinal R. Patel 2020 Irrevocable Family Trust Uad 10-6-2020 | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Rajan G Patel 2020 Irr Fam Tr Uad 12-3-2020 | Indirect ownership interest | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Patel, Rajan | Managing control - governing body | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Patel, Rajan | Corporate director | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Optum Management Solutions. Inc | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Sharon, Robert | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Solarewicz, Maciej | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Stevenson, Heaven | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Zuniga, Trisha | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| 1061 W Hackley Ave Propco LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Cliftonlarsonallen LLP | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Optum Management Solutions. Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Schlaupitz Madhavan | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Welltower Op, LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 07/01/2025 | |
| Conner, Marianne | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2025 | |
| Solarewicz, Maciej | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/03/2025 | |
| Zuniga, Trisha | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 09/03/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.
These are the official offices in Michigan. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.