Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center has a Trust Grade of C, indicating that it falls in the average range among nursing homes. It ranks #125 out of 422 facilities in Michigan, placing it in the top half of the state, and #15 out of 63 in Wayne County, meaning only 14 local options are ranked higher. The facility is showing an improving trend, with issues decreasing from 9 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025. However, it has less RN coverage than 99% of Michigan facilities, which could impact the level of care residents receive. Recent inspections revealed critical issues, including a resident leaving the facility unnoticed for approximately 10 hours, and another resident suffered a hip fracture after being turned by only one staff member instead of the required two, raising concerns about supervision and fall prevention. Despite these weaknesses, the facility has a staffing turnover rate of 38%, which is below the state average, indicating that staff members tend to stay longer and are more familiar with residents.
- Trust Score
- C
- In Michigan
- #125/422
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 38% turnover. Near Michigan's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $7,446 in fines. Lower than most Michigan facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ⚠ Watch
- Each resident gets only 10 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — below average for Michigan. Fewer RN minutes means fewer trained eyes watching for problems.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 17 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (38%)
10 points below Michigan average of 48%
Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Michigan avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Minor penalties assessed
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 17 deficiencies on record
Aug 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intakes 1227387 and 1227390.Based on interview and record review the facility failed to implement fall...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2025
1 deficiency
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake #MI00151498.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to utilize ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Nov 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 maintain the cleanliness of a geriatric recliner for o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
MDS Data Transmission
(Tag F0640)
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 ensure a Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was completed and transm...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide timely ADL (Activities of daily living) care t...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0688
(Tag F0688)
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 include one resident (R93) out of four residents reviewed for limite...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
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 respiratory care equipment was stored in a sani...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0790
(Tag F0790)
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 routine dental services were provided to one re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Safe Environment
(Tag F0921)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure resident equipment was cleaned and sanitized sanitary equipment for 14 of 14 residents that resided on the third floor. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
2 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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
This citation pertains to intake MI00143137.
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure an x-ray for one resident (R906) was completed in a timely manner.
Findings include:
Du...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
This citation pertains to intake MI00142795.
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide adequate supervision during care for one resident (R905) out of three residents reviewe...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
3 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
Quality of Care
(Tag F0684)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation has two deficient practice statements.
Deficient Practice Statement #1.
This citation pertains to Intake MI0013938...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #163
A review of R163's Electronic Medical Record revealed R163 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] and discharged f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
📢 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 multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation relates to intake MI00129792.
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a ...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2023
1 deficiency
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to intake MI00135760.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to adequately supervise R...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
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 obtain a physician's orders for oxygen therapy for on...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed follow the standards of infection control (hand washing, glove use), during Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and cleaning of room...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • 38% turnover. Below Michigan's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s), 1 harm violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 17 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • Grade C (56/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Michigan, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Staffed?
CMS rates Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 38%, compared to the Michigan average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center?
State health inspectors documented 17 deficiencies at Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center during 2022 to 2025. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 1 that caused actual resident harm, and 15 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center?
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 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 CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 188 certified beds and approximately 177 residents (about 94% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Detroit, Michigan.
How Does Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Compare to Other Michigan Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Michigan, Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (38%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "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 Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Michigan. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Stick Around?
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center has a staff turnover rate of 38%, which is about average for Michigan nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center Ever Fined?
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center has been fined $7,446 across 1 penalty action. This is below the Michigan average of $33,153. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center on Any Federal Watch List?
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 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.