3260 East B Avenue, Plainwell, MI 49080 · Kalamazoo County · (269) 349-6649
39 certified beds, about 33 residents a day · For profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 2008
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 235637 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on May 29, 2026, inspectors cited 12 health deficiencies (the Michigan average is 9.9, the national average 9.2).
Of 54 health citations since May 2024, 5 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $194,994 in the last three years; the largest was $161,356, and the latest is dated June 27, 2024.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.24 hours per resident per day, against 3.99 across Michigan and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.57 of those hours.
62.8% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Michigan average 44.1%).
CMS links it to Atrium Centers, an affiliated group of 26 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 54 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control data was regularly analyzed during QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meetings and completed at least one PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) related to quality issues identified by the quality assessment and assurance committee, resulting in the potential for systematic failures related to infection control and other quality deficiencies.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure the Infection Preventionist (IP) attended the QAPI (Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement) meetings, resulting in the potential for lack of resident care policies and overall medical care that could affect all residents residing in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate staffing to promote the physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being in 2 of 12 residents (Resident #22 & #26) reviewed for staffing, resulting in unmet care needs and the potential for physical and psychosocial harm for all residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services to promote dignity and respect in 2 residents (Resident #25 & #5) from a total sample of 20 residents, resulting in long call light wait times and the potential for feelings of diminished self-worth, sadness, and frustration.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to perform an assessment for self-administration of medication, obtain an order, and update the care plan for 2 residents (Resident #15, #33) of 12 Residents reviewed for self-administration of medications, resulting in the mismanagement of medications with a potential for adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intakes #3026243 and 3926437Based on observations, interviews, and record review, the facility failed to protect the residents' right to be free from physical abuse by another resident for 2 (Resident #2 and Resident #14) of 3 residents review for abuse, resulting in 1. Resident #2 being struck in the head several times, slapped, and kicked in the leg by Resident #22, and experiencing fear and psychosocial harm. 2. Resident #14 being placed in a chokehold (restraining technique in which an arm is tightly wrapped around the neck of another person) by Resident #22 and struck in the head several times.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to complete accurate assessments for 1 of 12 residents (Resident#14) reviewed for accurate assessments, resulting in an inaccurate reflection of the resident's status and the potential for impaired medical, functional, and psychosocial problems due to unidentified needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for medication administration for 1 resident (Resident #29) of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration, resulting in an inhaler (medication that is inhaled) being administered outside of manufacturer recommendations and oral pills being administered without following resident preference for being crushed, and the potential for adverse side effects and choking.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review the facility failed to identify pressure ulcers and ensure appropriate treatment interventions were in place for 1 resident (Resident #4) of 1 resident reviewed for pressure ulcers, resulting in Resident #4 developing a Stage 2 pressure ulcer on the left buttock and the potential for overall deterioration in health status.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intakes #3026243, #3026437Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement person centered dementia care interventions to address needs for 1(Resident #22) of 5 residents reviewed for dementia care, resulting in Resident #22 demonstrating symptoms of unmet care needs which included ongoing wandering, exit seeking, physical aggression toward others and rehospitalization.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to maintain a medication error rate less than 5% in 1 resident (Resident #29) of 5 residents reviewed for medication administration, resulting in the potential for medication adverse effects. The medication error rate was 6.25%.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to effectively implement Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) and maintain infection control standards during incontinence (involuntary leakage of urine and feces) care per Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance, in 2 residents (Resident #39 & #4) from a total sample of 20 residents, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination and the development and spread of infection to a vulnerable population.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake #2677662Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate monitoring and supervision to prevent elopement and respond appropriately to door alarms and Wanderguard (an alert bracelet that triggers an alarm near specific exits in the facility) alarms to ensure resident safety in 2 residents (Resident #101 and #104) of 2 residents reviewed for elopement/supervision, resulting in an Immediate Jeopardy when on 11/23/25 at approximately 6:00 PM, Resident #101 who was an elopement risk, exited the facility, unbeknown to facility staff, and was found by another resident, standing outside of the facility at an emergency exit door and the potential for Resident #104 to elope due to unknown Wanderguard functionality. [...]
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intakes #2677662 and #2648515. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to maintain an effective training program for all facility and agency staff, consistent with their role in the facility to ensure the safety of residents in 1 resident (Resident #101) of 2 residents reviewed for elopement, and 2 residents (Resident #102 and #107) of 4 residents reviewed for the administration of controlled substance, resulting in agency staff not responding properly to door alarms and licensed nursing staff not maintaining an accurate account of controlled substances.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake #2648515Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that medication records were in order and that an account of all controlled drugs was maintained and accurately reconciled for 2 residents (Resident #102 and #107) of 4 residents reviewed for the administration of controlled medications, resulting in the potential for ineffective management of pain and the potential for diversion of controlled drugs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure access to a call light in 4 of 10 sampled residents (Resident #104, R#102, R#105, and R#106) reviewed for call light placement, resulting in the inability to call for assistance and the potential for unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect resident privacy during personal care for 1 (Resident #109) of 10 residents reviewed for privacy/dignity, resulting in the potential for feelings of embarrassment.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake: 2618457 and 2618789Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's right to be free from staff to resident sexual abuse for 1 resident (Resident #108) reviewed for abuse, resulting in Resident #108 feeling concerned for physical safety enough to leave shortly after admission.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to 1287744Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of narcotic pain medication in 1 of 10 residents (Resident #103) reviewed for misappropriation of property, resulting in the theft of narcotic medications and the potential for delayed pain treatment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure clean and sanitary shared medical equipment, wheelchair cleaning for 1 (Resident #106) of 10 residents, resulting in the potential for cross contamination, infections, and bacterial harborage.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to employ a staff member with appropriate credentials to supervise and manage the dietary department, resulting in the potential for food service sanitation failures, food borne illness and for clinical areas of dietary needs of all residents being compromised and unmet.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure proper label and dating of foods and discarding of foods in the kitchen resulting in the potential to spread food borne illness to all residents that consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: During the initial tour of the kitchen on 5/5/2025 at 8:33 AM, the following was observed: The reach in refrigerator had a pitcher of iced tea, half full with a use by date of 5/4/2025. The walk-in refrigerator had 3 trays of individual juices in 12 oz plastic glasses with no label and date. During a full kitchen tour on 5/6/2025 at 9:17 AM, the following was observed in the dry storage room: [...]
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake number MI00151548 Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to: 1.) maintain a clean and homelike environment for 5 residents (R82, R15, R182, R134, and R135), and 2.) maintain comfortable noise level for 2 residents (R134 and R135) of 12 residents reviewed for homelike environment, resulting in potential for dissatisfaction with living conditions for the 5 residents and residents who are able to ambulate in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure an effective infection control program that included: 1. cleaning of resident equipment for 1 of 16 residents (R82), 2. appropriate hand hygiene and glove use (PPE-Personal Protection Equipment) during resident care in 2 of 16 residents (R82 and R29), 3. implementation of Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) per standards of practices for 2 of 16 residents (R29), reviewed for infection control, resulting in the potential for cross-contamination, harborage of bacteria, and increased infections in a vulnerable population.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to Intake MI00151548 Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain dignity for 2 of 4 residents (R29 and R21) reviewed for dignity, resulting in the potential for feelings of embarrassment based on the reasonable person concept.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure residents were assessed to determine if self-administration of medication was clinically appropriate in 2 of 2 residents (Resident #9, Resident #17) reviewed for self-administration of medications, resulting in unsupervised administration of medications and the potential for mismanagement of medication and adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to complete advance directives completely and accurately for 1 (Resident #134) of 12 residents reviewed for advance directives, resulting in the potential for resident preferences for medical care to not be followed by the facility staff.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, and record review, the facility failed to notify the resident representative of a resident exiting the facility in 1 of 2 residents (R15) reviewed for notification of changes, resulting in the responsible party not being made aware that R15 walked out a door observed but unattended and subsequent placement of a wander guard.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure psychotropic medications were not used without medical indication for use for 3 (Resident #134, Resident #182, and Resident #29) of 5 residents reviewed for chemical restraints.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a written bed hold notice and transfer/discharge notice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #5) reviewed for hospitalizations, resulting in the potential of residents and/or resident representatives being uninformed of the reason for transfer and not being able to hold a bed in the facility.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide meaningful activities to promote psychosocial well-being for 1 (Resident #27) of 12 residents reviewed for activities. This deficient practice resulted in social isolation, feelings of loneliness, frustration and boredom.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to adequately assess, monitor, and treat a change of skin condition in 1 of 1 resident (R21) reviewed for quality of care, resulting in a delay in assessment, treatment, pain, and the potential for worsening of condition and infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow physician's orders to complete a wound dressing in 1 of 1 resident (R29) reviewed for pressure ulcer care, resulting in a missed opportunity to provide care needed to heal a pressure wound and prevent infection.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to: 1.) implement interventions to ensure a safe environment in 1 of 1 resident (R15) and, 2. ensure the safety of residents during wheelchair transport in 2 of 3 residents (R134 and R182) reviewed for safety, resulting in the potential for R15 to elope from the facility and increase potential for injury for R134 and R182.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate urinary catheter care and assessment for the need of an indwelling catheter (catheter inserted in through the urethra and into the bladder) for 1 of 1 resident (R29) reviewed for catheter care, resulting in the potential for the dislodgement, injury, pain, development of urinary infection and decline in overall health status.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide ongoing communication and collaboration with the contracted dialysis facility regarding dialysis care for 1of 1 resident (Resident #135) reviewed for dialysis, resulting in the potential for unmet medical needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure COVID-19 immunizations were offered to 1 (Resident #21) of 5 residents reviewed for COVID-19 immunizations, resulting in an increased risk for infection, and the potential spread of COVID-19 infection to other residents, staff, and visitors.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a Registered Nurse (RN) was on duty for 8 consecutive hours a day, seven days a week, resulting in the potential for inadequate coordination of routine or emergency care affecting all residents in the facility.
Inspectors wroteThis citation is linked to intake # MI00145717 Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide an environment free from abuse in 3 residents (Resident #100, Resident #101, and Resident #102) of 5 residents reviewed for abuse, resulting residents experiencing fear, avoidable pain, bruising, and a potential for more serious injury.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent falls for 2 (Resident #26 and Resident # 7) of 12 residents reviewed for falls, resulting in falls with fractures, decline in functional abilities, increased pain, and a potential for further injuries.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to: (1) effectively clean and maintain food service equipment and (2) date mark all potentially hazardous ready-to-eat food products effecting 33 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, and resident foodborne illness.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews, and record reviews, the facility failed to effectively clean and maintain the physical plant effecting 33 residents, resulting in the increased likelihood for cross-contamination, bacterial harborage, and decreased illumination.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an environment that promoted and enhanced resident dignity in one resident (R7) of 12 residents reviewed for dignity, resulting in the potential of feelings of humiliation and embarrassment.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, interviews and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement person centered care plan for 1 of 12 residents (Resident #26) reviewed for care planning, resulting in unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide sufficient staffing to meet residents needs in three residents (Resident #7, Resident #20, Resident #26) of 12 residents reviewed for staffing resulting in falls with injuries and unmet resident care needs.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow up on pharmacist recommendations and ensure the physician documented review of pharmacy recommendations for one resident (Resident #6) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use potentially resulting in incomplete monitoring of the use of medications for residents. Findings Include: Resident #6 (R6) Review of the Face Sheet and Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] revealed R6's admission date to the facility was on 10/17/2022 and she had diagnoses of hallucinations, cognitive communication deficit, depression, and anxiety. Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score was a 12 which indicated her cognition was moderately impaired (8-12 moderately impaired). During an interview on 6/25/2024 at 10:05 AM, resident was pleasant and confused. She was unable to answer some questions. [...]
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that residents of the facility were free from unnecessary psychotropic medication by completing gradual dose reductions for two residents (Resident #6, Resident #22) of five residents reviewed for unnecessary medication use resulting in incomplete monitoring of medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a double-lock system for a controlled substance in the facility's medication refrigerator resulting in the potential for diversion and/or misappropriation of medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure proper use of personal protective equipmen, during cares for 2 (Resident #26 and Resident #82), hand hygiene, labeling/dating IV tubing, and clean medication administration for 1 resident (Resident #82) of 12 residents reviewed for infection control, resulting in a potential for the transmission/transfer of pathogenic organisms and cross contamination between residents and staff.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intakes: MI0014331, MI00143140, MI00142071, MI00139687, and MI00144696 Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to protect residents rights to be free from mental abuse, verbal abuse, and physical abuse by staff and other residents in 5 of 8 residents' (Resident #101, Resident #103, Resident #105, Resident #106, and Resident #107) reviewed for abuse, resulting in
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake number MI00144696. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to throughly implement the abuse policy to protect, investigate, report and prevent staff to resident abuse and bruises of unknown origin for 3 of 5 residents (Resident #101, Resident #105, and Resident #106) reviewed for abuse, resulting in ongoing staff to resident verbal and mental abuse of Residents #101 and Resident #105, escalation of the abuse to staff to resident physical abuse of Resident #101.
Inspectors wroteThis citation pertains to intake #MI00144223 Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to prevent residents from insect bites and install window screen in 1 of 3 residents (Resident #108) reviewed for quality of care, resulting in Resident #108 suffering a spider bite and subsequent significant wound requiring debridement (removal of dead or infected tissue), increased pain, need for antibiotic treatment, and ongoing wound care.
Inspectors wroteBased interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure individualized approaches were provided to 1 (Resident #101) of 3 residents reviewed for dementia care, resulting in Resident #101 experiencing avoidable stress responses to care interventions.
13 fire safety citations on file: 8 on May 29, 2026, 4 on May 8, 2025, 1 on June 27, 2024.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| June 27, 2024 | Fine | $33,638 |
| June 27, 2024 | Payment Denial | 22 days from July 23, 2024 |
| May 16, 2024 | Fine | $161,356 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
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) | 3.24 | 3.99 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 0.57 | 0.78 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 2.89 | 3.50 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 1.79 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.88 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 62.8% | 44.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 33.3% | 39.2% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 1 |
CMS expects 3.56 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 3.39 on weekdays and 2.89 on weekends, 15% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 16.8% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.26 in April to June 2025 to 3.24 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 | 3.24 | 0.57 | 3.39 | 2.89 | 16.8% | 0 of 90 | 33 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.31 | 0.81 | 3.49 | 2.86 | 17.4% | 0 of 92 | 33 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.36 | 0.85 | 3.55 | 2.87 | 14.9% | 0 of 92 | 34 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.26 | 0.89 | 3.42 | 2.86 | 18.5% | 0 of 91 | 34 |
| 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 | 5.3 | 10.8 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.8 | 3.0 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.1 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 9.8 | 12.0 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.0 | 5.1 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 7.5 | 14.8 | 15.4 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Plainwell Pines Nursing and Rehabilitation Communi's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (54.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
54.4% 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. 29 eligible stays.
9.7% 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. 27 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 15 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 15 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 19 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 19 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
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. 8 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: ATRIUM PLAINWELL, INC.. CMS links this home to Atrium Centers, a group of 26 nursing homes averaging 2.9 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atrium Centers, LLC | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 10/01/2007 |
| Bailey, Essel | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 74% | 12/27/2012 |
| Finney, Donald | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Individual | 25% | 08/22/2012 |
| Bailey, Essel | Corporate director | Individual | 10/01/2007 | |
| Finney, Donald | Corporate director | Individual | 08/22/2012 | |
| Albright Ross, Susan | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/02/2018 | |
| Ferkany, James | Corporate officer | Individual | 08/01/2018 | |
| Atrium Centers Management LLC | Operational/managerial control | Organization | 10/01/2007 | |
| Albright Ross, Susan | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/02/2018 | |
| Lockhart, Dennis | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 08/01/2018 | |
| Morris, Bette | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/18/2016 |
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.