Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot
Inspected within the last 6 months. Data reflects current conditions.
Regency on the Lake in Fort Gratiot, Michigan has a Trust Grade of B+, indicating it is above average and generally recommended for families considering care options. It ranks #78 out of 422 nursing homes in Michigan, placing it in the top half, and #4 out of 5 in St. Clair County, suggesting that only one local facility offers better care. The facility is improving, having reduced its issues from three in 2024 to two in 2025. Staffing is a notable strength, with a 4/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 25%, significantly lower than the state average, which means caregivers are more likely to know and understand the residents' needs. While there have been no fines, which is positive, there have been some concerning incidents, such as failure to properly label and date medications and not notifying family of a resident's serious health changes. Overall, Regency on the Lake shows strengths in staffing and care quality but needs to address medication management and communication practices.
- Trust Score
- B+
- In Michigan
- #78/422
- Safety Record
- Low Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ✓ Good
- 25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Michigan's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 54 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Michigan. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
Low Staff Turnover (25%) · Staff stability means consistent care
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover is low (25%)
23 points below Michigan average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, staff retention, fire safety.
The Bad
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Jul 2025
1 deficiency
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0761
(Tag F0761)
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 properly store, label, and date medications for one resid...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 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
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 Intakes MI00151561.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to document notification...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jun 2024
3 deficiencies
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
R1
A review of the medical record revealed that R1 admitted into the facility on 5/28/2014 with the following diagnoses, Weakness and Abnormal Posture. A review of the Minimum Data Set assessment reve...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to secure smoking/vape pens for one sampled resident (R5...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0919
(Tag F0919)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the call light was within reach of one resident (R1) out of one reviewed for call lights. Findings include:
On 06/04/2...
Read full inspector narrative →
Sept 2023
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
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 Intake MI00139026.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to implement adequately s...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2023
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
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 develop a care plan for use of a right hand orthosis...
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 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 ensure medications were administered per order for one...
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 answer call lights in a timely manner, assist with bri...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This citation has two deficient practices.
This citation pertains to Intake MI00135496.
Deficient practice #1.
Based on observat...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
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 thickened liquids per diet order for one resi...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure a 14-day stop date was ordered for an as-needed (PRN) psycho...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store and maintain nebulizer masks in a sanitary mann...
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
- • Grade B+ (88/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Michigan.
- • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Michigan facilities.
- • 25% annual turnover. Excellent stability, 23 points below Michigan's 48% average. Staff who stay learn residents' needs.
- • 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
About This Facility
What is Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much 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 Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot Staffed?
CMS rates Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 25%, compared to the Michigan average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot during 2023 to 2025. These included: 13 with potential for harm.
Who Owns and Operates Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot?
Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot 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 130 certified beds and approximately 125 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a mid-sized facility located in Fort Gratiot, Michigan.
How Does Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot Compare to Other Michigan Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Michigan, Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (25%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (5 stars) is much above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot?
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 Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot 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 5-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 Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot Stick Around?
Staff at Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot tend to stick around. With a turnover rate of 25%, the facility is 20 percentage points below the Michigan average of 46%. Low turnover is a positive sign. It means caregivers have time to learn each resident's needs, medications, and personal preferences. Consistent staff also notice subtle changes in a resident's condition more quickly. Registered Nurse turnover is also low at 18%, meaning experienced RNs are available to handle complex medical needs.
Was Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot Ever Fined?
Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot 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 Regency On The Lake - Fort Gratiot on Any Federal Watch List?
Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot 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.