Medilodge of St. Clair
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Medilodge of St. Clair has a Trust Grade of C+, which means it is considered decent and slightly above average among nursing homes. It ranks #150 out of 422 facilities in Michigan, placing it in the top half, but it is last in St. Clair County at #5 of 5. The facility is improving, with issues dropping from 12 in 2024 to just 2 in 2025. Staffing is a strong point, earning a perfect 5 out of 5 stars with a turnover rate of 33%, which is well below the state average. Although there have been no fines, which is a positive sign, there are serious concerns, such as an incident where a staff member made abusive comments toward a resident and another where a resident was not given medications as prescribed, leading to emotional distress. Additionally, there were reports of flies in residents' rooms, indicating a need for better maintenance and cleanliness. Overall, while the facility has strengths in staffing and a low fine record, it still faces significant challenges that families should consider.
- Trust Score
- C+
- In Michigan
- #150/422
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 33% turnover. Near Michigan's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 52 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Michigan. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 33 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (33%)
15 points below Michigan average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
13pts below Michigan avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 33 deficiencies on record
Sept 2025
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
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 pertains to Intake: 2584046.Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to administer physician orde...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2025
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
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to Intake MI00149376.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to follow professional st...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2024
12 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
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 meet professional standards of care for medication ad...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to apply compression stockings as physician ordered for one (R111) of four residents reviewed for care standards. Findings inclu...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
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** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to update the status of wound from non-pressure to press...
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** R107
On 10/01/24 09:56 AM, R107 was observed lying in bed with the head of their bed elevated approximately 30 degrees (not upri...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to safely and properly store portable oxygen for one (R27) of four residents reviewed. Findings include:
Review of the facility...
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 provide respiratory care consistent with professional...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0745
(Tag F0745)
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, and facility failed to provide medically related social services for two Res...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to put a 14 day stop date on an PRN (as needed) antianxiety medication for one resident (R60) out of two reviewed for unnecessary medications....
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one unattended medication cart (the C-wing cart) of three carts reviewed was locked during medication administration. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medical Records
(Tag F0842)
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 complete and accurate medical records for two ...
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 to follow infection prevention and control guidelines for glove use for one (R92) of one resident reviewed for infecton control. ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 10/01/24 at 10:12 a.m., R64 was observed in their room seated in a reclining manual wheelchair. Two flies landed on Resident ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
10 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 a comfortable, homelike environment for thre...
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
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
This citation pertains to Intake M100136063.
Based on interviews and record review, the facility failed to protect the resident's (R88) right to be free from verbal abuse by staff. Findings include:
R...
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
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to document and provide showers per resident schedule for one sampled resident (R41) of two reviewed for showers resulting in, di...
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
Deficiency F0687
(Tag F0687)
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 that podiatry services were offered to one resi...
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
Deficiency F0698
(Tag F0698)
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 assure timely transportation to and from dialysis for one resident ...
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
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
R68
On 8/7/23 at 11:47 AM, R68 was observed in bed eating while visiting with relatives. A medication cup full of medications/pills were observed on the resident's overbed table next to the food they ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0804
(Tag F0804)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based upon observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to serve food in a palatable manner and at the preferre...
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
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
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 that bedtime snacks were offered/provided to one resident (R4...
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
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure infection control practices were followed during resident provided care for three residents (R42, R76, R23) of three re...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the proper concentration of chemical sanitizer, failed to ensure handwashing to prevent cross contamination, and faile...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jan 2023
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
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 MI00133884.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure rock salt...
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
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
This citation pertains to MI00131714.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure/document non-pharmacological interventions were implemented prior to use of an as needed (PRN)...
Read full inspector narrative →
May 2022
7 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to Intake: MI00125053.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to prevent ...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Deficiency F0740
(Tag F0740)
A resident was harmed · 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 administer nonpsychiatric and/or psychotropic behavior...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Investigate Abuse
(Tag F0610)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation pertains to Intake: MI00125053.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to conduct thorough inve...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
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 follow/develop care plan interventions following fall...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to remove expired medications and supplies and/or failed to date opened medications from the medication cart resulting in the pot...
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
This citation pertains in part to MI00127182.
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure staff food, insect and debris were cleaned up and rooms maintained in a h...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
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 ensure that food was served in a palatable manner and ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
- • 33% turnover. Below Michigan's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 33 deficiencies on record, including 2 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Medilodge Of St. Clair's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Medilodge of St. Clair 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 Medilodge Of St. Clair Staffed?
CMS rates Medilodge of St. Clair's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 33%, compared to the Michigan average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Medilodge Of St. Clair?
State health inspectors documented 33 deficiencies at Medilodge of St. Clair during 2022 to 2025. These included: 2 that caused actual resident harm and 31 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Medilodge Of St. Clair?
Medilodge of St. Clair 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 MEDILODGE, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 158 certified beds and approximately 111 residents (about 70% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in East China, Michigan.
How Does Medilodge Of St. Clair Compare to Other Michigan Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Michigan, Medilodge of St. Clair's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 3.1, staff turnover (33%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (3 stars) is at the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Medilodge Of St. Clair?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "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?"
Is Medilodge Of St. Clair Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Medilodge of St. Clair 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 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 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 Medilodge Of St. Clair Stick Around?
Medilodge of St. Clair has a staff turnover rate of 33%, 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 Medilodge Of St. Clair Ever Fined?
Medilodge of St. Clair 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 Medilodge Of St. Clair on Any Federal Watch List?
Medilodge of St. Clair 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.