Allegria Village

15101 Ford Rd, Dearborn, MI 48126 (313) 582-2097
For profit - Individual 89 Beds ATIED ASSOCIATES Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
55/100
#184 of 422 in MI
Last Inspection: August 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Allegria Village in Dearborn, Michigan, has a Trust Grade of C, indicating it's average and falls in the middle of the pack when compared to other facilities. It ranks #184 out of 422 facilities in Michigan, placing it in the top half, and #26 out of 63 in Wayne County, meaning only a few local options are better. Unfortunately, the trend is worsening, with issues increasing from 5 in 2023 to 10 in 2024. Staffing is a concern, with a 64% turnover rate that is significantly higher than the Michigan average of 44%, and the facility has less RN coverage than 81% of its peers, which can impact the quality of care. On a positive note, there have been no fines, which is encouraging, but there have been serious incidents, such as a failure to properly assess a resident after a fall, leading to hospitalization and death, as well as complaints about cold and unappetizing food leading some residents to skip meals.

Trust Score
C
55/100
In Michigan
#184/422
Top 43%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Getting Worse
5 → 10 violations
Staff Stability
⚠ Watch
64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 33 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Michigan. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
⚠ Watch
16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
★★★☆☆
3.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★☆☆
3.0
Care Quality
★★★☆☆
3.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2023: 5 issues
2024: 10 issues

The Good

  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record

Facility shows strength in fire safety.

The Bad

3-Star Overall Rating

Near Michigan average (3.1)

Meets federal standards, typical of most facilities

Staff Turnover: 64%

18pts above Michigan avg (46%)

Frequent staff changes - ask about care continuity

Chain: ATIED ASSOCIATES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

Staff turnover is elevated (64%)

16 points above Michigan average of 48%

The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Aug 2024 7 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0584)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a clean and comfortable environment for one re...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a clean and comfortable environment for one resident (R291) out of one resident reviewed for safe, clean, homelike environment resulting in resident dissatisfaction and a tripping hazard. Findings include: On 8/20/24 at 10:32 AM, R291 was observed in bed. When asked about living conditions in the facility R291 said there is a hole in the floor near my bed and my tray table keeps getting stuck in it. I'm afraid when I start to walk more, I will trip because of the hole. When asked if R291 reported the hole in the flooring to staff members R291 reported Yes, the faciltity is aware of it. There was an approximate four by eight-inch patch of missing floor covering observed near R291's bed. On 8/21/24 at 9:33 AM, R291 was observed sitting in a wheelchair next to bed with bedside table wheel resting in hole in the flooring. R291 demonstrated tipping bedside table in the hole in the flooring. Record review of R291's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed admission to the facility on 8/16/2024 with diagnoses which included muscle weakness and seizures. Review of R291's Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment performed on 8/19/24 revealed a BIMS of 15/15 intact cognition. Review of R291's Fall risk assessment dated [DATE] revealed a score of 19 indicating at risk for falls. On 8/21/24 at 2:01 PM in an observation of R291's floor with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) G, it was reported the facility was aware of the hole in the flooring. On 8/22/24 at 3:12 PM Maintenance Director (MD) E was interviewed and said when a resident discharges from a room, maintenance completes a room audit and completes any repairs needed. MD E stated, I'm aware that there is a hole in the floor. When asked for the maintenance room audit for June, July and August of 2024 MD E was not able to produce the documentation. MD E agreed the hole in the flooring was a tripping hazard and cannot be properly cleaned. On 8/22/24 at 1:09 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed and agreed the hole in R291's room floor was a trip hazard and infection control concern since the flooring could not be cleaned properly. Review of the facility policy titled Maintenance Service revised 2009 revealed in part . Maintenance service shall be provided to all areas of the building, grounds, and equipment. Maintenance personnel maintain the building in good repair and free form hazards.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0676 (Tag F0676)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a toilet transfer for one resident (R291) of f...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide a toilet transfer for one resident (R291) of four residents reviewed who were dependent on staff for performance of activities of daily living (ADLs), resulting in unmet care needs and resident dissatisfaction. Findings include: On 8/21/24 at 1:08 PM, R291 was interviewed about care in the facility and stated, The aide last night Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) H told me I couldn't use the toilet and to pee on myself instead. So, I wet myself. It's embarrassing and I'm upset. R291 was observed crying and stated, I can use the toilet with help, but she didn't want to help me. Record review of R291's Electronic Health Record (EHR) revealed admission to the facility on 8/16/2024 with diagnoses which included muscle weakness and seizures. Review of R291's Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) assessment performed on 8/19/24 revealed a BIMS of 15/15 intact cognition. Review of R291's Fall risk assessment dated [DATE] revealed a score of 19 indicating at risk for falls. Review of R291's physical therapy note dated 8/20/24 revealed: Bed Mobility Roll left and right = Partial/moderate assistance Sit to lying = Substantial/maximal assistance Lying to sitting on side of bed = Substantial/maximal assistance Transfers Sit to stand = Partial/moderate assistance Chair/bed-to-chair transfer = Substantial/maximal assistance Toilet transfer = Partial/moderate assistance Ambulation Walk 10 feet = Partial/moderate assistance Gait Distance = 40 feet; Assistive Device = Two-wheeled Walker Review of R291's ADL Task- Toilet form revealed one-person physical assist for toilet transfer on 8/20/24. On 8/21/24 at 1:51 AM not applicable was documented by CNA H and at 8:14 AM set up help was documented by CNA K. On 8/21/24 at 2:09 PM Licensed Practical Nurse G was interviewed and said CNAs should assist R291 to the toilet. On 8/22/24 at 11:22 AM Occupational Therapy Assistant I and Physical Therapy Assistant J were interviewed and said R291 required moderate assistance (50% assistance from staff) to transfer and can use the toilet with moderate assistance from an aide when using a wheelchair. On 8/22/24 at 1:07 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed and said, CNAs should help R291 empower themselves to use the toilet. Review of the facility policy titled Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting revised March 2018 revealed in part .Residents will be provided with care, treatment and services as appropriate to maintain or improve their ability to carry out activities of daily living (ADLs). Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming and personal and oral hygiene.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intakes MI00146255 and MI00146314. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intakes MI00146255 and MI00146314. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision for one resident (R77) out of one resident reviewed for elopement, resulting in the potential for heat exposure and being struck by a motor vehicle when R77 left an appointment unsupervised. Findings include: Record review of facility's Investigation Summary and Conclusion (no date), revealed R77 was taken to an appointment on 7/31/24 at approximately 8:30 AM via facility bus transportation. R77 was left unattended. At approximately 3:51 PM the facility was made aware that R77 was not present for pick-up. Further review revealed that R77 was found at 8:30 PM and returned to the hospital. Record review of R77's electronic medical record (EMR) revealed admission into the facility on 7/8/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of aphasia following a cerebral infarction (unable to comprehend language related to a stroke). According to the Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) dated 7/12/24, R77 scored 11/15 (impaired cognition). Review of Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], R77 required partial to substantial assistance with Activities of Daily Living (ADLS). Further review of EMR revealed resident did not have a guardian in place. Record review of temperatures for Detroit on 7/31/24 documented a high of 90 degrees Fahrenheit. During an interview on 8/21/24 at 2:15 PM with Director of Nursing (DON), it was reported that R77 was taken to an appointment and was not escorted with supervision. When asked if the resident should have had supervision related to impaired cognition, DON said, R77 should have had been provided with supervision. When asked was there a potential the resident could have been struck by a vehicle or impaired by heat exposure, DON said, Yes. During an interview on 8/21/24 at 3:14 PM with Nursing Home Administrator (NHA), it was reported that the resident was found by an ambulance service walking along I-94 expressway and was taken back to the hospital. It was then reported that residents with a BIMs of 12 or below will now receive an escort for supervision when going to outside appointments. Record review of facility policy Safety and Supervision (no date) documented, Our facility strives to make the environment as free from accident hazards as possible. Resident safety and supervision and assistance to prevent accidents are facility wide priorities. Further review of policy found no interventions in policy to escort residents that are cognitively or physically impaired to appointments outside of the facility.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0883 (Tag F0883)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure three residents (R4, R18, and R25) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided pneumococcal and influenza vaccina...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure three residents (R4, R18, and R25) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided pneumococcal and influenza vaccination and education, resulting in the potential for development and spread of influenza and pneumonia among vulnerable residents in the facility. Findings include: On 8/22/2024 at 10:08 AM the Infection Preventionist (IP) D was interviewed and reported the following residents R4 and R18 did not have documentation of a current pneumococcal immunization or refusal and R25 did not have documentation of current influenza immunization or refusal. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) for R4 revealed admission to the facility on 5/10/2024 with diagnosis of dementia and cerebral infarction (stroke). Further review of EHR revealed R4 did not have documentation to indicate that the pneumococcal vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. Review of the EHR for R18 revealed admission into the facility on 6/20/2024 with diagnosis of muscle weakness and dementia. Further review of EHR revealed R18 did not have documentation to indicate that the pneumococcal vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. Review of the EHR for R25 revealed admission into facility on 8/22/2022 with diagnosis of hypertensive heart disease and cerebral infarction. Further review of EHR revealed R25 did not have documentation to indicate that the influenza vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. On 8/22/2024 at 1:12 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed and agreed both R4 and R18 should have been educated and offered the pneumococcal vaccine and that R25 should have been offered the influenza vaccine for the 2023/2024 flu season. Review of the facility policy titled Vaccine Policy and Procedure undated, revealed in part: .The facility is required to offer the Flu, Covid-19, and Pneumonia vaccines to residents during the flu season, providing education on these vaccines to those who decline them.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0887 (Tag F0887)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (R4 and R18) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided Covid-19 vaccinations and education result...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two residents (R4 and R18) out of five residents reviewed for immunizations were provided Covid-19 vaccinations and education resulting in the potential for development and spread of Covid-19 among vulnerable residents in the facility. Findings include: On 8/22/2024 at 10:08 AM the Infection Preventionist (IP) D was interviewed and reported the following residents R4 and R18 did not have documentation of a current Covid-19 immunization or refusal. Review of the Electronic Health Record (EHR) for R4 revealed admission into the facility on 5/10/2024 with diagnosis of dementia and cerebral infarction (stroke). Further review of EHR revealed R4 did not have documentation to indicate that the Covid-19 vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. Review of the EHR for R18 revealed admission into the facility on 6/20/2024 with diagnosis of muscle weakness and dementia. Further review of EHR revealed R18 did not have documentation to indicate that the Covid-19 vaccine was offered or was contraindicated. On 8/22/2024 at 1:12 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) was interviewed and agreed both R4 and R18 should have been educated and offered the Covid-19 vaccine. Review of the facility policy titled Vaccine Policy and Procedure undated revealed in part .The facility is required to offer the Flu, Covid-19, and Pneumonia vaccines to residents during the flu season, providing education on these vaccines to those who decline them.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0804 (Tag F0804)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide meals that were palatable for three residents (...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to provide meals that were palatable for three residents (R7, R9 and R22) out of three resident that consumed meals in rooms, resulting in cold and visually unappealing foods. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents that consume food from the kitchen. Findings Include: R9 On 8/20/2024 at 11:20 AM, R9 was quiered about meals. R9 said, that he does not care for the food and often skips meals. R9 explained, sometimes the food is cold and it does not taste that good. Record review revealed R9 was admitted into facilty on 7/26/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of Type ll diabetes. According to Brief Interview for Mental Status, (BIMS) dated 8/1/24, R9 scored of 15 out of 15 (intact cognition). R22 On 8/20/2024 at 2:30 PM, R22 was interviewed and reported not being able to eat the food because it is cold. Record review revealed R22 was admitted into the facility on 7/12/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of necrotizing fascitis(flesh eating bacteria). According to BIMs dated 7/18/24, R22 scored 15 out of 15 (intact cognition). R7 On 8/20/24 at 11:30 A.M and on 8/21/24 at 1:10 P.M., R7 complained the food was cold and served with a clear piece of tightly, fitted wrap to cover the food. R7 stated, the clear wrap left food soggy at times. The resident indicated eating meals in the room and did not want to eat in the dining room. Review of the admission Face sheet indicated R7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] for hospice care with diagnoses that included: heart failure, hypertension, and Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). R7 had a BIMS (Brief interview for status) of 13 of 15 for cognition and required one person assist to complete Activities of Daily living. On 8/22/24 at 1:00 P.M. a lunch test tray was performed on the First floor. Temperatures taken were as follows: Chopped Steak with gravy- 103.2 Degrees (D) Fahrenheit (F). Au Gratin Potatoes -110 D.F Peas and Carrots-83- D.F Vanilla Pudding- 53.2-D.F. Each food item was served in Styrofoam containers and covered with clear saran wrap. The saran wrap was tightly wrapped over the entrée causing excess condensation (water) and food to appear mashed and merged. Supervisor A who was present during the testing was queried concerning the use of any heating element used to maintain the food temperature. The supervisor reported the heating system previously used to maintain the food temperature was broken for approximately two years and was unsure of the status of repair or replacement. Supervisor A was informed of the food complaints received related to cold food and food served smashed from the tight saran wrap, particularly residents who ate their meals in their rooms. Supervisor A reported the status of the equipment repair would have to be addressed with the administrator in the absence of the Director of the department. On 8/22/24 at 2:15 P.M. the Administrator was made aware of the concerns related to the cold food but provided no evidence when the heating unit would be repaired or replaced. On 8/22/24 at 2:00 P.M. and 3:30 P.M. a policy was requested but not provided. Upon exiting the facility at 4:35 P.M. no other information was presented pertaining to the cold food.
CONCERN (F) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Safe Environment (Tag F0921)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

R9 On 8/20/2024 at 11:20 AM, R 9 was queired about if he had any concerns with the facility. R9 explained they had previously been a resident of the facility and it has gone down in the upkeep. R9 sai...

Read full inspector narrative →
R9 On 8/20/2024 at 11:20 AM, R 9 was queired about if he had any concerns with the facility. R9 explained they had previously been a resident of the facility and it has gone down in the upkeep. R9 said, it used to be much cleaner now it appears that the staff do not clean the way they use to. R9 said sometimes things are dropped on the floor and staff just walk over them intead of picking them up. Record review revealed R9 was admitted into facilty on 7/26/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of Type ll diabetes. According to Brief Interview for Mental Status, (BIMS) dated 8/1/24, R9 scored of 15 out of 15 (intact cognition). R22 On 8/20/2024 at 2:30 PM, R22 was inteviewed and explained staff could do a better job of cleaning. Record review revealed R22 was admitted into the facility on 7/12/24 with a pertinent diagnosis of necrotizing fascitis(flesh eating bacteria). According to BIMs dated 7/18/24, R22 had scored 15 out of 15 (intact cognition). On 8/22/24 At 2:56 P.M. the Administrator was interviewed concerning the broken equipment. The Administrator said, a requisition for replacement/rental contract of the dish machine had just been approved (8/15/24), however review of the document revealed there was no evidence of any implementation date of service or installation. The Administrator acknowledged concerns related to the other broken equipment but provided no explanation when the facility would address the issues observed during the tour. Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to maintain functional equipment and a sanitary environment 1) Replace the floor carpeting of the halls on the first, second and third floor of the facility 2) Clean the ceiling air vents in three kitchenettes, 3) replace and or repair the broken heating system for resident's food and 4) Ensure functional water faucets were attached to the hand washing sinks properly. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all 69 residents in the facility. Findings include : On 8/20/24 at 9:00 A.M. through 8/22/24 at 3:20 P.M. the carpeting on the first, second and third floor was observed heavily soiled, stained and severely worn. Visible collections of dust and lint were noted around the edges of the flooring. On 8/22/24 at 11:08 A.M.Maintenance Director E was interviewed concerning the cleaning of the carpet and said his department was not responsible for cleaning of the carpet, however indicated the housekeeping department could address the concern. On 8/22/24 at 2:55 P.M. interview with Housekeeping Director C revealed the facility did not have a cleaning rotation for the carpet. In the past the carpet was cleaned every three months and as needed for stains. Housekeeping Director C indicated carpeting had been removed in the Assisted living of the building but had no specific time frame when the carpeting would be addressed in the long-Term Care portion of the building. On 8/21/24 at 1:00 P.M., during observation in the kitchen and kitchenette of the facility the following concerns were identified: 1. In the main Kitchen area-a broken dish machine. Reported by Dining Supervisor A it was not replaceable or repairable since it broke on July 11,2024. 2. Approximately 4 Missing Freezer curtain slots in the main freezer near the dock area, no rubber gasket around lower bottom of the freezer door, causing accumulated ice and frost on the door and entry. The missing bottom rubber gasket allowed potential entry of rodents and foreign matter 3. Broken heating system (Conduction system) used to maintain resident food temperatures during serving. Dining Supervisor reported heating system had not been functional and used in 2 years. 4. Floor ceiling plate cover in the kitchen area adjacent to the B elevator was detached leaving an opening in the floor. Kitchenettes 1. Ceiling vents in two of three kitchenettes (First and third floor) were heavily soiled with lint, dust and grease. On the first-floor visible spider webs were noted suspended over the food cart during service. 2. Second floor coffee machine- broke. 3. Ice machine on the third floor not functioning. 4. On the first and third floor the left hand faucet of the hand washing sinks and eye washing apparatus was not working properly.
May 2024 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake numbers MI00143709. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide schedu...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake numbers MI00143709. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide scheduled showers for two residents (R506 and R508) out of three residents reviewed for activities of daily living (ADL's), resulting in the potential for unmet hygiene needs, loss of dignity, and emotional distress. Findings include: R506 Review of an admission Record revealed, R506 readmitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnosis which included Dementia and Multiple Fractures of Pelvis. R506 was discharged to the hospital on 5/2/24. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated of 4/19/24 revealed R506 had cognitive impairment with a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 out of 15. Review of a bathing task revealed, R506 had no documented showers or bed baths for the last 30 days (April 2024). Review of the 1st floor shower schedule revealed, R506's scheduled showers days were Wednesday and Saturday on the 6-2 shift. On 5/2/24 at 12:41p.m., R506 and R508's shower documentation was requested from the NHA via email. R508 On 5/2/24 at approximately 9:30 am, R508 declined an interview with the surveyor. Review of an admission Record revealed, R508 admitted to the facility on [DATE] and readmitted on [DATE] with pertinent diagnosis which included Enterocolitis due to C-Diff (inflammation in small intestine and colon) and Displaced Intertrochanteric Fracture of Left Femur. Review of a MDS assessment dated of 1/25/24 revealed R508 had no cognitive impairment with a BIMS score of 14 out of 15. Review of a bathing task revealed, R508 had no documented showers or bed baths for the last 30 days (April 2024). Review of the 3rd floor shower schedule revealed, R508's scheduled showers days were Monday and Thursday on 2-10 shift. On 5/2/24 at 1:51 p.m., the NHA provided a progress note dated 2/8/24 indicating R508 declined a shower and a bed bath. The NHA did not provided documented showers for R506 or R508 for the last 30 days. In an interview on 5/2/24 at 2:15 p.m. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C reported the nurse should complete a skin observation on scheduled shower days and the CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistant) should chart in POC (care charting system). In an interview on 5/2/24 at 2:16 p.m. Unit Manager D reported showers should be documented in POC and nurses should complete a skin assessment. In an interview on 5/2/24 at 2:27 p.m. CNA E reported showers are documented in the POC. In an interview on 5/2/24 at 2:31p.m. Unit Manager F reported showers are documented in the POC by the CNAs. Unit Manager F then reported the nurse documents the shower on the skin assessment and should document all refusals. In an interview on 5/2/24 at 2:34 p.m. the Director of Nursing (DON) reported showers are documented in by POC by the CNAs. The DON then reported the nurses should complete a skin assessment on shower days. The DON reported there was no shower documentation found for R506 or R508. Review of a Activities of Daily Living (ADL), Supporting policy revised March 2018 documented the following: Residents who are unable to carry out activities of daily living independently will receive the services necessary to maintain good nutrition, grooming, and personal and oral hygiene.
Mar 2024 2 deficiencies 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to properly assess (obtai...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to properly assess (obtain vital signs and complete neurological checks) after a reported, unwitnessed fall for one resident (R603) out of six residents reviewed for falls. R603 was on anti-coagulant therapy. R603's fall was followed by hospitalization for a brain bleed and subsequent death. Findings include: Review of an admission Record in the EHR (Electronic Health Record) revealed, R603 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included chronic atrial fibrillation and abnormalities of gait and mobility. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], revealed R603 had no cognitive impairment as indicated by a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, out of a total possible score of 15. Review of a progress note with a date of [DATE] at 2:23 p.m., documented, Around 1:50 PM, assigned CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported to writer that resident told her that he fell. CNA did not observed resident on the floor, he was in bed, and call light on. Writer went in with co-worker, alert and oriented with periods of confusion, checked resident skin, no new skin issues noted, informed staff that he hit his head at the door, he doesn't know how he got to the door, nothing noted to the scalp . Unit manager notified . On coming nurse notified to monitor resident for any changes . Review of a progress note with a date of [DATE] at 10:56 p.m., revealed, Resident received 5pm meds and tolerated well . Resident didn't complain of any discomfort or appear to be in any distress. A few moments later EMT (Emergency Medical Transportation) arrived stating that they were here for (R603's room) . On call Provider notified that resident called 911 for his self. Daughter called and notified us that he was currently in emergency surgery that he had bleeding on the brain. Writer called on call provider notified . Review of Physician orders revealed R603 had an order for Warfarin (blood thinner/anticoagulant) 5 mg (milligrams) by mouth at bedtime (9 pm). Review of a February 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) revealed R603 received Warfarin on 2/15 and [DATE] at 9 pm. Review of an incident report, dated [DATE] revealed, R603 reported falling and hitting his head. Review of vital signs in the EHR revealed R603 did not have any documented blood pressure readings between 9 am and 6 pm on [DATE], on the date of the reported fall. However, review of a hospital document, dated of [DATE] at 6:11 p.m., revealed R603 presented to the emergency department following a fall where he reported hitting his head. R603 was hypertensive (increased blood pressure) and tachycardic (increased pulse rate) upon arrival. A CT scan (used to diagnose internal injuries or damage) was performed and found R603 had a large brain bleed. In an interview on [DATE] at 2:16 p.m., the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) A reported R603 did not have any neurological checks (used to assess changes in mental status and level of consciouness, pupil response, motor strength, sensation, and gait) performed on [DATE]. In an interview on [DATE] at 2:26 p.m., the Director of Nursing (DON) reported R603 had an unwitnessed fall. The off-going nurse was leaving and endorsed to oncoming nurse to monitor R603. The Director of Nursing (DON) reported when a resident falls and hits their head neurological checks (neuro checks) should be completed. The DON reported neuro checks should be completed to assess the resident for changes. The DON reported R603's family called the facility and told them R603 had a brain bleed and died. In an interview on [DATE] at 8:53 a.m. CNA E reported R603 had on the call light which prompted her to go to the room. CNA E reported R603 was in bed and reported the fall and that he hit his head on the door. CNA E then reported telling the nurses about what R603 reported. In an interview on [DATE] at 10:20 a.m. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) C reported during shift report at approximately 2 pm, LPN I reported R603 fell and hit his head. LPN C then reported LPN I asked her to monitor R603 during the shift for neurological changes. LPN C reported she did not observe R603 until medication pass at approximately 5pm. LPN C reported the EMT's arrived on the unit when she walked to the medication cart after exiting R603's. Review of the Change in Condition policy revised February 2021, documented in part the following, Prior to notifying the physician or healthcare provider, the nurse will make a detailed observations and gather relevant information and pertinent information for the provider . 8. The nurse will record in the resident's medical record information relative to changes in the resident's medical/mental condition or status . Review of a Guidelines & Risk Management for Falls policy (undated) documented, Instruction for completion . Residents should be assessed head to toe. Note any injury. Unwitnessed falls initiate neuro checks immediately. Contact DON for all residents on anti-coagulants. Contact the doctor, the family/emergency contact, DPOA and Guardian to inform of fall and whether to send to hospital .
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Notification of Changes (Tag F0580)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform family of a fal...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake MI00142789. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform family of a fall for one resident (R603) of six residents reviewed for falls. Findings include: Review of an admission Record revealed, R603 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnoses which included chronic atrial fibrillation and abnormalities of gait and mobility. R603's family was listed as the emergency contact. Review of a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] revealed R603 had no cognitive impairment with a Brief interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 14, out of a total possible score of 15. Review of a progress note with a date of 2/17/24 at 2:23 p.m., revealed Around 1:50 PM, assigned CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant) reported to writer that resident told her that he fell. CNA did not observed resident on the floor, he was in bed, and call light on. Writer went in with co-worker, alert and oriented with periods of confusion, checked resident skin, no new skin issues noted, informed staff that he hit his head at the door . On coming nurse notified to monitor resident for any changes . In an interview on 3/6/24 at 2:31p.m. the Director of Nursing (DON) reported a resident's family should be notified when they fall. The DON confirmed R603's family was not notified of the fall. In an interview on 3/7/24 at 9:32 a.m. Concerned Family Member (CFM) F reported the facility did not notify them that R603 had a fall or was transferred to the hospital. CFM F reported the hospital called and informed them that R603 was in the ER with a brain bleed. Review of the facility document Guidelines & Risk Management for Falls (undated) revealed, Instruction for completion . Contact the doctor, the family/emergency contact, DPOA and Guardian to inform of fall and whether to send to hospital .
Aug 2023 5 deficiencies
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Transfer Notice (Tag F0623)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to Intake #MI00133266. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the court app...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to Intake #MI00133266. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to notify the court appointed legal guardian/family member before discharging out of the facility for one resident (R325) out of three residents reviewed for discharge, resulting in the guardian/family being unaware of where their loved one was relocated and not being involved in the discharge planning. Findings include: Review of the clinical record for Resident #325 (R325) revealed the resident was admitted into the facility on [DATE] and discharged on 11/27/22 with diagnoses that included pneumonia, metabolic encephalopathy, hypertension, respiratory failure, and a history of falls. According to the Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], R325 was moderately cognitively impaired and required assistance with Activities of Daily Living. Review of the Order Regarding Appointment of Temporary Legal Guardian of Incapacitated Individual, provided by the facility during the survey, revealed that Guardian C was granted Guardianship to R325 for dates 11/3/22 until 12/8/22. In an interview on 8/7/23 at 12:43 PM Guardian C stated, The facility let my family member leave with a stranger and didn't notify me. I had no idea where my family member was until (R325) called me and told me where they were. The discharge plan was for (R325) to discharge from the facility directly to an apartment on the same property complex. I was not told of the change in discharge. I was very upset and concerned about the welfare of my family member. Record review of R325's discharge progress note dated 11/27/22 revealed that Guardian C was not contacted regarding R325's discharge out of the facility and to a friend's home. Review of a late entry progress note dated 12/8/22 failed to document the date and time that Guardian C was contacted about R325's discharge. In an interview on 8/7/23 at 11:21 AM the Nursing Home Administrator (NHA) said R325 was discharged on 11/27/22 to a friend's home until her apartment was scheduled to be ready on 12/1/22. When asked did anyone from your facility contact Guardian C regarding the change in discharge plans, the NHA stated, We tried but (Guardian C) did not return our calls or messages. When asked to provide evidence of attempts to notify Guardian C of the revised discharge plan to a friend's home, the NHA provided notification of R325's discharge directly to the apartment on the facility campus not of the discharge to the friend's home. Review of the facility policy, Discharging the Resident, revised 12/2016, revealed: - That his or her family will be informed of the discharge and where the resident will be living. - If the resident is being discharged home, ensure that the resident and/or responsible party receive teaching and discharge instructions.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Quality of Care (Tag F0684)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess the effectiveness of administered anti-diarrheal medication ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to assess the effectiveness of administered anti-diarrheal medication and communicate incidents of loose stools/diarrhea for one resident (R32) of one resident reviewed for diarrhea/constipation, resulting in resident frustration and incidents of loose stools/diarrhea going untreated. Findings include: During an interview on 8/1/2023 at 12:30 PM, when Resident #32 (R32) was queried if diarrhea or constipation was a concern, she said she had diarrhea. R32 added the nurse gave her a pill for it. R32 said when the diarrhea continued and she requested another pill, none was provided. A review of R32's clinical record documented an admission date of 4/8/2021 with diagnoses that included heart disease, spinal stenosis, and peripheral vascular disease. A Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented intact cognition and total physical dependence on staff for toilet use. A review of physician orders documented to provide Anti-Diarrheal 2 gm tab, one tablet by mouth every eight hours as needed for diarrhea with a start date of 4/3/2023. A review of R32's August 2023 Medication Administration Record (MAR) documented the administration of one tablet of anti-diarrheal medication on 8/1/2023. The effectiveness of the anti-diarrheal medication was marked U which signified unknown. No subsequent anti-diarrheal medication had been administered. A review of Certified Nurse Assistant (CNA) documentation of R32's bowel movement consistency during August 2023 revealed the following: 8/1/2023 at 9:54 PM: normally formed stool. 8/2/2023 at 10:52 AM: resident bowel incontinence - stool consistency not documented. 8/3/2023 at 8:24 AM: resident bowel incontinence - stool consistency not documented. 8/4/2023 at 3:14 AM: loose/diarrhea. 8/4/2023 at 1:24 PM: resident bowel incontinence - stool consistency not documented. 8/4/2023 at 9:26 PM: loose/diarrhea 8/5/2023 at 9:59 AM: resident bowel incontinence - stool consistency not documented. 8/5/2023 at 9:59 PM: loose/diarrhea 8/6/2023 at 11:53 AM: normally formed stool. 8/6/2023 at 9:59 PM: loose/diarrhea 8/7/2023 at 5:59 AM: loose/diarrhea A review of nursing notes between 8/1/2023 and 8/6/2023 revealed the following reference to the administration of the anti-diarrheal medication: Order administration note of 8/1/23 at 9:33 PM documented to early to see if medication is effective. PRN Administration was: Unknown. The review of nursing notes revealed staff did not assess, monitor, document, or follow-up on R32's response to the administration of the anti-diarrheal medication or her continued incidents of loose stool/diarrhea. During an interview and record review on 8/7/2023 at 11:33 AM, the Director of Nursing (DON) said that R32's loose stools/diarrhea had not been triggered for her. R32's August 2023 MAR, bowel elimination documentation, and nursing progress notes were reviewed with the DON. The DON said nursing should have assessed the effectiveness of the administered anti-diarrheal medication on 8/1/2023 to see if they needed to do something different. The DON added the physician should have been notified regarding R32's loose/diarrheal stools in case they wanted to order some other test. The DON said there should have been some communication between the CNAs and nurses regarding R32's stool consistency.
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Incontinence Care (Tag F0690)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to properly secure indwelling catheter tubing for one res...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to properly secure indwelling catheter tubing for one resident (R40) of three residents reviewed for urinary catheters, resulting in the potential for genital trauma. Findings include: In an observation on 8/1/23 at 10:20 a.m., Resident #40 (R40) laid in bed and had a urinary catheter. Tea colored urine was observed in the tubing. Review of an admission record revealed, R40 admitted to the facility on [DATE] with pertinent diagnosis of a right humerus fracture and right and left pelvic fractures. Review of a Minimum Data Set assessment, dated 7/30/23, revealed R40 was cognitively impaired and required an indwelling catheter. In an observation and interview on 8/3/23 at 8:30 AM, Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) B was observed performing ADL care for R40. CNA B stated, The foley isn't attached (anchored) to his leg and the catheter bag is on the floor. CNA B said R40 should have an anchor or leg strap on the catheter and the catheter bag should be off the floor. In an interview on 8/3/23 at 8:55 AM Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) A stated, There is blood in (R40's) catheter line and looks like sediment too. There is blood at the opening of the penis where the foley catheter line inserts. I will put an actual leg strap on after his shower since the anchor isn't attached. Review of R40's care plan did not include foley catheter management. In an interview on 8/3/23 at 2:59 PM the Director of Nursing (DON) agreed R40's catheter bag should not be on the floor and the catheter line (tubing) should be anchored to their leg. The DON explained if the foley tubing isn't anchored it can pull on the genitalia. Review of the facility policy, Catheter Care, Urinary, dated August 2022, revealed: - Ensure that the catheter remains secured with a securement device to reduce friction and movements at the insertion site. - Be sure the catheter tubing and drainage bag are kept off the floor.
CONCERN (E)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0761 (Tag F0761)

Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents

Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to (1.) properly monitor the temperature of one medication storage refrigerator out of two refrigerators reviewed for medication ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to (1.) properly monitor the temperature of one medication storage refrigerator out of two refrigerators reviewed for medication storage, (2.) properly date two opened insulin pens stored in the medication cart, and (3.) failed to ensure an unopened insulin pen was refrigerated as indicated per manufacturer's instructions for one medication cart out of three medication carts reviewed for medication storage, resulting in the potential to administer unsafe, ineffective, and outdated medications. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 8/2/2023 at approximately 9:18 a.m., the first-floor medication storage room refrigerator was observed with thick ice covering the top where ice trays were to be stored. RNM (Registered Nurse Manager) I confirmed midnight shift nurses were to monitor the refrigerator's temperature every night, log it on the temperature log, and thaw out the refrigerator freezer. After reviewing the temperature log, RNM I indicated that there was an out-of-range documented temperature of 29 degrees and that the refrigerator temperature range should be between 31 degrees to 41 degrees. RNM I acknowledged that the refrigerator temperature was out of range for medication and stated, They (nursing staff) should have thawed the refrigerator when they saw all the ice buildup. A copy of the first-floor refrigerator temperature log was requested for review but not provided by the end of the survey. A review of the second floor Refrigerator Temperature and Cleaning Log documented the following: - Night Nurse will record the temperature in the temp. column and will initial that this has been completed in the initial column. - If action is necessary, such as adjusting the temperature because the refrigerator is too cold or too hot, the corrective action will recorded in the action column. - The refrigerator Must Be cleaned nightly, and nurse must initial that the refrigerator was cleaned according to policy. Record the initials of the staff that cleaned the refrigerator in the box under the column Cleaned. On 8/2/2023 at approximately 10:30 a.m., the contents of the second floor high end medication cart were observed with Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) J. Two Insulin pens (one Lispro and one Glargine) were observed opened and undated. LPN J was unable to state when the Lispro insulin and Glargine insulin pens were opened and how long they could be stored in the medication cart before expiring. LPN J said Resident #427 (R427) still received insulin and added R427 received two units from the undated Lispro insulin pen this morning for sliding scale coverage. In addition, the packaging for one unopened and undated Lispro insulin pen was documented with R427's room number and the date delivered by the pharmacy. LPN J confirmed the unopened insulin pen should have been in the refrigerator until opened and the opened Lispro and Glargine should have been dated with the date they were opened. The High Alert' instructions on the insulin pen bags were reviewed with LPN J and revealed, Refrigerate until opened, once opened, store at room temperature for twenty-eight days of date opened. According to the electronic medical record, R427 was initially admitted into the facility on 7/22/2023 with diagnoses that included diabetes mellitus type two and Alzheimer's disease. Review of R427's Physician's orders documented, Insulin Glargine subcutaneous solution pen-inject twenty-eight units subcutaneous and insulin Lispro solution pen per sliding scale coverage (sliding scale coverage insulin is given to cover high abnormal blood sugars). A review of the facility policy, Refrigerator and Freezer, dated November 2022, revealed: - The facility will ensure safe refrigerator and freezer maintenance, temperatures, and sanitation . Storage of Medications: - The nurse's staff is responsible for maintaining medication storage and preparation areas in a clean, safe, and sanitary manner. - Temperature must not exceed 41 degrees Fahrenheit. If the refrigerator is temping above this, please adjust the temperature. TEMPERATURE SHOULD BE IN RANGE OF 36-46 DEGREES. - The refrigerator MUST BE cleaned nightly and ensure ice building up is not present in freezer. Nurse must initial that the refrigerator was cleaned and checked for buildup according to policy . A review of the facility policy, Pharm Script, dated August 2020, revealed: - 1. Expiration dates (beyond-use-dates) of dispensed medication shall be determined by the pharmacist a the time of dispensing. - 3. Certain medications or package types, such as Intravenous solutions, multiple dose injectable vials .requires an expiration date shorter than the manufacturer's expiration date once opened to ensure medication purity and potency.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0925 (Tag F0925)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure that the facility is free of pests resulting in an increased potential fo...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to maintain an effective pest control program to ensure that the facility is free of pests resulting in an increased potential for contamination of food, both food and non-food contact surfaces, and foodborne illness potentially affecting staff, visitors and all 59 residents. Findings include: On 8/1/23 at 10:12 AM, four live flies were observed in the kitchen's dishwashing area. On 8/1/23 at 10:19 AM, seven live flies were observed near the kitchen's janitors closet and waste receptacle holding area. Upon observation the surveyor inquired with Dining Director, staff D on the current state of the insects in this area to which they responded, I think they come in when they take out the trash and the doors are open. It's usually not too bad. On 8/1/23 at 10:21 AM, the surveyor requested the facility's pest control policy to review to which staff D responded, I am not the best one talk to about that, but I will make sure that we will get what we have to you. On 8/1/23 at 11:06 AM, two live flies were observed near the kitchen's walk in coolers in the basement hallway. On 8/3/23 at 10:58 AM, six live flies were observed near the kitchen's janitors closet and waste receptacle holding area. Upon observation the surveyor inquired with staff D on the current state of the insects in this area to which they responded, the pest company just came out Tuesday afternoon and treated the building. At this time the surveyor asked if staff D would accompany them to where the trash is disposed of to which they stated, of course. On 8/3/23 at 11:02 AM, upon inspection of the trash compactor and loading dock area the surveyor observed both loading dock garage style doors fully opened, uncovered waste receptacles with visible waste on the interior of them, numerous live flies swarming throughout the area, and strong odor present. On 8/3/23 at 11:13 AM, record review of the facility's most recent pest control service record dated, 8/1/23 revealed that the targeted pests treated at facility on this date were ants, rats, mice and spiders. No mention of flies, or application areas in the basement or kitchen were observed by the surveyor while reviewing this document. Review of 2017 U.S. Public Health Service Food Code, Chapter 6-501.111 Controlling Pests, directs that: The PREMISES shall be maintained free of insects, rodents, and other pests. The presence of insects, rodents, and other pests shall be controlled to eliminate their presence on the PREMISES by: (B)Routinely inspecting the PREMISES for evidence of pests;
May 2022 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Deficiency F0697 (Tag F0697)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one resident (R335) out of two sampled residents...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure one resident (R335) out of two sampled residents assessed for pain was addressed timely, resulting in voiced feelings of isolation, frustration, and unalleviated pain. Findings include: During the initial tour conducted on 5/17/22 at 10AM, R 335 was observed in bed with her head elevated. Following an introduction R 335 stated, Well I am so glad to see you. The situation here is ridiculous and I am glad to be leaving today. I was admitted to this facility on May 5th at around 7:30 PM and it took the staff here 3 days to get my medications. I really needed something for pain because I am a dialysis patient, and I recently received a new shunt. My arm is still very painful. I asked the staff to give me some pain medication and they stated my medications had not been received from the hospital. After several hours I asked again and this time I was informed by the nurse that she could not get into the Pixus ( a system for storing medications that requires an access code to enter). On the next day May 6th, the doctor came to my room, and he took my history. I thought I was going to at least get my pain medication then, but I still did not get it. I did not even receive my Xanax. I did not get any pain medication until May 7th. The resident stuck out her left arm , and the surveyor observed a slightly reddened raised area on her upper left arm. The surveyor observed the resident with tears in her eyes. A record review was conducted on 5/19/22 at 4:00PM. R 335 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with relevant diagnosis that included: Unspecified Pain, Chronic Kidney Disease, Fibromyalgia (chronic widespread pain), anxiety disorder, and Type 2 Diabetes. According to the admission record R 335 was cognitively intact. On 5/6/22 the MD wrote an order for Hydrocodone-APA 10-335 mg 1 tab every 4 hours by mouth as needed, and Xanax 0.5 mg I tab by mouth twice daily as needed. According to the pharmacy packing slip the C2 medication (narcotic) Hydrocodone-APA was received by the pharmacy on 5/6/22 at 9PM and delivered to the facility on 5/7/22 at 3:48 AM. Per a nursing progress note dated 5/7/22 at 5:22 AM R 335 pain was assessed at 9/10 (the highest level of pain on a scale from 0-no pain to 10-extreme pain) and was administered Norco ( Hydrocodone-APA 10-335 mg) from the Pixus and was effective. A record review on 5/19/22 at 4:15 PM revealed a pain management care plan dated 5/6/22 with an established goal of resident comfort level will be achieved and maintained within the next 3 months. Interventions included: administering medications as ordered, note for signs of relief, assess pain for location, duration, intensity, and frequency. Allow resident time to verbalize fears and anxiety, monitor for verbal/nonverbal complaints of pain. Notify MD if pain worsens or resident does not respond to analgesics. On 5/20/22 a document entitled Pain Assessment and Management with a revision of March 2020 was received by the Administrator (AA). Under the section entitled Defining Goals and Appropriate Interventions: The pain management interventions should be consistent with the resident's goals for treatment. Pain management shall reflect the sources, type, and severity of pain. Acute pain ( or significantly worsening pain should be assessed every 30 to 60 minutes after onset and reassessed as indicated until relief is obtained. Upon completion of the pain assessment, the person conducting the assessment shall record the information obtained from the assessment in the resident's medical record.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Why is there high staff turnover? How do you retain staff?"
  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
Concerns
  • • 16 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
  • • Grade C (55/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
  • • 64% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
Bottom line: Mixed indicators with Trust Score of 55/100. Visit in person and ask pointed questions.

About This Facility

What is Allegria Village's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Allegria Village an overall rating of 3 out of 5 stars, which is considered average nationally. Within Michigan, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This mid-range rating indicates the facility meets federal standards but may have areas for improvement.

How is Allegria Village Staffed?

CMS rates Allegria Village's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 64%, which is 18 percentage points above the Michigan average of 46%. High turnover can affect care consistency as new staff learn residents' individual needs. RN turnover specifically is 62%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.

What Have Inspectors Found at Allegria Village?

State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at Allegria Village during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 15 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Allegria Village?

Allegria Village is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by ATIED ASSOCIATES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 89 certified beds and approximately 75 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Dearborn, Michigan.

How Does Allegria Village Compare to Other Michigan Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Michigan, Allegria Village's overall rating (3 stars) is below the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (64%) is significantly higher than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Allegria Village?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "How do you ensure continuity of care given staff turnover, and what is your staff retention strategy?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's high staff turnover rate.

Is Allegria Village Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Allegria Village has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 3-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in Michigan. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Allegria Village Stick Around?

Staff turnover at Allegria Village is high. At 64%, the facility is 18 percentage points above the Michigan average of 46%. Registered Nurse turnover is particularly concerning at 62%. RNs handle complex medical decisions and coordinate care — frequent RN changes can directly impact care quality. High turnover means new staff may not know residents' individual needs, medications, or preferences. It can also be disorienting for residents, especially those with dementia who rely on familiar faces. Families should ask: What is causing the turnover? What retention programs are in place? How do you ensure care continuity during staff transitions?

Was Allegria Village Ever Fined?

Allegria Village has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Allegria Village on Any Federal Watch List?

Allegria Village is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.