Michigan ›Bay City

Carriage House Nursing and Rehabilitation

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

2394 Midland Road, Bay City, MI 48706 (opens Google Maps) · Bay County · (989) 684-2303· 120 certified beds · avg 109 residents/day · certified since May 1, 2001 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Part of chain: PREFERRED CARE (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.7★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 13, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 6, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.99
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5 · how star ratings work →

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 6, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Apr 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 6, 2024 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 27, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 34 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. F-0812

  2. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. F-0880

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. F-0806

View all 34 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 13, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
May 13, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
May 13, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691
May 13, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Apr 6, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Mar 13, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · F-0726
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · F-0810
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Feb 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Oct 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · from a complaint · F-0660
Mar 28, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Mar 28, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Mar 28, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677
Mar 28, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint · F-0725
Mar 28, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Mar 28, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Mar 28, 2024C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · F-0732
Mar 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Mar 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Mar 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755
Mar 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 10).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 1

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024151G ▲
202580E
2026111G ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

How to file a complaint about care →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMichigan averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.99
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.60
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.39
Michigan average: 3.79
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMichigan avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.994.323.95bottom 43% in Michigan; top 40% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.600.840.69bottom 28% in Michigan; top 48% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.393.793.50bottom 32% in Michigan; top 48% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.370.490.48bottom 40% in Michigan; bottom 46% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)46.344.145.8bottom 43% in Michigan; bottom 46% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.339.242.9top 38% in Michigan; top 33% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.85, RN 0.58, weekend 3.27.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.85 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Carriage House Nursing and Rehabilitation. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Individual

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Bay City Opco Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%11/01/2020
Green, DovIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest35%11/01/2020
Klein, YoniIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest40%11/01/2020
Schnell, DavidIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest25%11/01/2020
Ahmed, NaeemIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Ahmed, NaeemIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Bay City Realty Holdings LLCOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Bay City Realty Holdings LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Burke, GregoryIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/30/2020
Burke, GregoryIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/30/2020
Green, DovIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Klein, YoniIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Klein, YoniIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Preferred Care at Lansing MNGT LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Rubinfeld, EliIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020
Schnell, DavidIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2020

All 16 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Preferred Care — 13 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 12 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
  • "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "How many aides are on each shift, and how do you make sure every resident gets timely help with bathing, dressing, and meals?"
  • "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Michigan midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 46% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 16 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 16 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Bay Shores Senior Care and Rehab Center1.6 miBay City, MI★★★★☆3/5
Caretel Inns of Tri-Cities3.8 miBay City, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Hampton Nursing and Rehabilitation4.6 miBay City, MI★★★★☆4/5
Huron Woods Nursing Center6.7 miKawkawlin, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Bay County Medical Care Facility7.8 miEssexville, MI★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Great Lakes Rehabilitation Center8.7 miSaginaw, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Stratford Pines Nursing and Rehabilitation Center10.6 miMidland, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Hoyt Nursing & Rehab Centre11.0 miSaginaw, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Saginaw Senior Care and Rehabilitation Center, LLC11.1 miSaginaw, MI★★★★☆3/5
Covenant Skilled Nursing and Rehabilitation at Wel11.1 miSaginaw, MI★★★★☆3/5
Healthsource Saginaw, INC11.2 miSaginaw, MI★★★☆☆2/5
Brittany Manor11.5 miMidland, MI★★★☆☆2/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Bay City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235599.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details