MichiganClio

Maple Woods Manor

13137 North Clio Road, Clio, MI 48420 · Genesee County · 151 certified beds · avg 103 residents/day · certified since Mar 27, 1992

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

Part of chain: THE PEPLINSKI GROUP (10 facilities, chain avg rating 2.1★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
5
Serious findings on record
$58,583
Fines, last 3 years
4.04
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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 self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 8, 2026 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: May 5, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 24, 2025 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jul 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 21, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Feb 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 15, 2024 · F-0692

The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.

Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Mar 18, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Nov 3, 2022 · F-0690

The 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.

Why it matters: Poor continence and catheter care leads to infections, skin breakdown, and loss of dignity.

Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Dec 7, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (33)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jun 3, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Jun 3, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Apr 8, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Aug 13, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint
Jun 24, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 11, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Apr 11, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.
Apr 11, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes.
Jan 21, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint
Feb 15, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Feb 15, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits.
Feb 15, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
Nov 3, 2022▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 3, 2022F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Nov 3, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 3, 2022E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Nov 3, 2022D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 9).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022101G ▲
202481G ▲
2025122G ▲
202631G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $58,583.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jan 21, 2025Fine$42,990
Feb 15, 2024Fine$15,593

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

MeasureThis facilityMichigan avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.044.323.95bottom 47% in Michigan; top 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.480.840.69bottom 17% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.673.793.50top 44% in Michigan; top 34% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.280.490.48bottom 24% in Michigan; bottom 28% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)43.544.145.8top 46% in Michigan; top 46% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)52.939.242.9bottom 24% in Michigan; bottom 31% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, 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 3.88, RN 0.46, weekend 3.53. Staffing rating: 3/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

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

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ackerman, AmyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Baumgarten, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Baumgarten, ThereseIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
David Lebenbom Irrv TrOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest17%10/10/2006
Lebenbom, StuartIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest17%01/16/2025
Peplinksi Holdings, INC.OrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Peplinski, SheliIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Peplinski, ToddIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Schade, JefferyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Schade, TamaraIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Thompson, BrianIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Thompson, ShellyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/21/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Baumgarten, MichaelIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/21/2012
David Lebenbom Irrv TrOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/10/2006
Evans, LaceyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/28/2025

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Medilodge of Montrose INC6.7 miMontrose, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Medilodge of Frankenmuth9.6 miFrankenmuth, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Wellspring Lutheran Services9.6 miFrankenmuth, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Majestic Care of Flushing9.8 miFlushing, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Kith Haven11.1 miFlint, MI★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Briarwood Nursing and Rehabilitation11.8 miFlint, MI★★★☆☆2/5
Villa at Beecher Place13.2 miFlint, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Willowbrook Manor13.2 miFlint, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Avista Nursing and Rehabilitation14.9 miSaginaw, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Regency at Grand Blanc17.7 miGrand Blanc, MI★★★★★3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Clio →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235518.