McLaren Lapeer Region
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
McLaren Lapeer Region has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice for families considering nursing home options. It ranks #46 out of 422 facilities in Michigan, placing it in the top half, and is the best option among four local facilities in Lapeer County. The trend is improving, with reported issues decreasing from 14 in 2023 to just 6 in 2024. Staffing is a strong point, earning a 5 out of 5 stars rating with a turnover rate of 39%, which is better than the state average. However, there have been some concerning incidents, including a failure to ensure safe fall prevention measures for residents, leading to serious injuries, and lapses in food safety and sanitation in the kitchen. Overall, while there are notable strengths, families should be aware of the facility's past issues and the need for ongoing improvements.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Michigan
- #46/422
- Safety Record
- Moderate
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 39% 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 278 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Michigan nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 31 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 (39%)
9 points below Michigan average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Michigan avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
The Ugly 31 deficiencies on record
Sept 2024
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0558
(Tag F0558)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #70:
A record review of the Face sheet and medical record indicated Resident #70 was admitted to the facility on [DATE]...
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 pertains to Intake Numbers MI00141690 and MI00145384,
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the faci...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to appropriately store supplies in one Clean Utility/ Medi...
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 ensure Infection Prevention and Control standards of ...
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
Deficiency F0700
(Tag F0700)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This Citation pertains to Intake Number MI00141690.
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to pe...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that the Quality Assessment and Process Improvement (QAPI) meetings were held quarterly, resulting in the lack of identification of c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2023
14 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide documentation of adequate notice of Medicare Part A benefits of non-coverage for 1 resident (Resident # 63) of 3 Residents that wer...
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
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This Citation Pertains to Intake Number MI00137064.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure an alleg...
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
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 Number MI00137064.
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to investigate an ...
Read full inspector narrative →
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
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to develop and implement comprehensive resident-centered care plans for three residents (Resident #108, Resident #110, and Resident #112) of 1...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to 1) incorporate the standards of care into the fall policy and operationalize the fall policy for Resident #110, who had a fall...
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
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that nebulizer equipment was maintained in a clean and sanitary manner for one resident (Resident #108) of one resident...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0710
(Tag F0710)
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 one resident ( Resident #60) of one resident reviewed f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff competence and education for abuse for two of five staff members, resulting in the staff lacking necessary qualifications to p...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to 1) Properly store/secure medications for Resident #109...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0809
(Tag F0809)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide Resident #112, who had signs/symptoms of hypoglycemia and diagnoses of diabetes, with a bedtime (HS) snack and offer H...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0868
(Tag F0868)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that the required composition of the Quality Assurance Process Improvement (QAPI) committee members were in attendance for 2 of 4 qu...
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 F0947
(Tag F0947)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 1 of 3 nurse aides, reviewed for mandatory 12 hours of yearly training,, had the required training, resulting in the potential ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0655
(Tag F0655)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #108:
A review of Resident #108's medical record revealed an admission into the facility on 6/26/23 with diagnoses that...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple 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 products were properly labeled with a...
Read full inspector narrative →
Apr 2022
11 deficiencies
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
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** Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility 1) Failed to provide a safe environment to prevent falls resulti...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0678
(Tag F0678)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure that an Emergency Crash Cart was inspected daily to ensure the cart was fully operational and ready for use in emergen...
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 maintain and ensure that respiratory equipment (nasal ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0725
(Tag F0725)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** This Citation pertains to Intake Number MI00125570
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensu...
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 follow the standards of infection control practice re...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Comprehensive Care Plan
(Tag F0656)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #4:
According to admission face sheet, Resident #4 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses that included...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
ADL Care
(Tag F0677)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Resident #7:
According to Electronic Medical Record, Resident #7 was admitted to the facility on [DATE], with diagnoses: Weaknes...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0726
(Tag F0726)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that 2 nurses received yearly Competencies/Performance Evaluations, failed to ensure 3 Nursing Assistants receive Dementia training ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0727
(Tag F0727)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure that a Registered Nurse was on duty for 8 consecutive hours a day seven days a week, resulting in the likelihood of inadequate coord...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(E)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Staffing Information
(Tag F0732)
Could have caused harm · This affected multiple residents
Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the clinical staff posting of nursing hours was completed and accurate daily, for clinical staff on duty, resulting in...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** On 4/11/22 at 7:05 AM, during kitchen tour box of burger patties were found in a produce refrigerator with expiration date of 4/...
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.
- • 39% turnover. Below Michigan's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • 31 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
About This Facility
What is Mclaren Lapeer Region's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns McLaren Lapeer Region 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 Mclaren Lapeer Region Staffed?
CMS rates McLaren Lapeer Region's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 39%, compared to the Michigan average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.
What Have Inspectors Found at Mclaren Lapeer Region?
State health inspectors documented 31 deficiencies at McLaren Lapeer Region during 2022 to 2024. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm and 30 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Mclaren Lapeer Region?
McLaren Lapeer Region is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 19 certified beds and approximately 16 residents (about 84% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Lapeer, Michigan.
How Does Mclaren Lapeer Region Compare to Other Michigan Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Michigan, McLaren Lapeer Region's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (39%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Mclaren Lapeer Region?
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 Mclaren Lapeer Region Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, McLaren Lapeer Region 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 Mclaren Lapeer Region Stick Around?
McLaren Lapeer Region has a staff turnover rate of 39%, 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 Mclaren Lapeer Region Ever Fined?
McLaren Lapeer Region 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 Mclaren Lapeer Region on Any Federal Watch List?
McLaren Lapeer Region 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.