13137 North Clio Road, Clio, MI 48420 (opens Google Maps) · Genesee County · (810) 686-2600· 151 certified beds · avg 103 residents/day · certified since Mar 27, 1992 · 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 →
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.
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: May 5, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Jul 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Feb 18, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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 18, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Dec 7, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The 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
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint F-0804
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. · from a complaint F-0600
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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 3, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Jun 3, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Apr 8, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Aug 13, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Jun 24, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | 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 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0578 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0553 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0657 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0676 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Apr 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0693 |
| Jan 21, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · F-0947 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 · F-0658 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0695 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0758 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · F-0791 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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. · F-0690 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | 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 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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. · F-0550 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The 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 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0637 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Nov 3, 2022 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 9).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 8 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 12 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 3 | 1 | G ▲ |
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.
How to file a complaint about care →
2 fines totaling $58,583.
Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2025 | Fine | $42,990 |
| Feb 15, 2024 | Fine | $15,593 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Michigan avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.04 | 4.32 | 3.95 | bottom 47% in Michigan; top 38% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.48 | 0.84 | 0.69 | bottom 17% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.67 | 3.79 | 3.50 | top 44% in Michigan; top 34% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.28 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 24% in Michigan; bottom 28% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 43.5 | 44.1 | 45.8 | top 46% in Michigan; top 46% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 52.9 | 39.2 | 42.9 | bottom 24% in Michigan; bottom 31% 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 3.88, RN 0.46, weekend 3.53.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.88 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Maple Woods Manor. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ackerman, Amy | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Ackerman, Ricky | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Baumgarten, Michael | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Baumgarten, Therese | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| David Lebenbom Irrv Tr | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 17% | 10/10/2006 |
| Lebenbom, Stuart | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 17% | 01/16/2025 |
| Peplinksi Holdings, INC. | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Peplinski, Sheli | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Peplinski, Todd | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Schade, Jeffery | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Schade, Tamara | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Thompson, Brian | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Thompson, Shelly | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 7% | 01/01/2012 |
| Ackerman, Ricky | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2012 |
| Ackerman, Ricky | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2012 |
| Ackerman, Ricky | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Ackerman, Ricky | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2012 |
| Baumgarten, Michael | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/21/2012 |
| David Lebenbom Irrv Tr | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/10/2006 |
| Evans, Lacey | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/28/2025 |
Showing 20 of 40 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 20 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Peplinski Group — 10 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 9 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medilodge of Montrose INC | 6.7 mi | Montrose, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Medilodge of Frankenmuth | 9.6 mi | Frankenmuth, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Wellspring Lutheran Services | 9.6 mi | Frankenmuth, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Majestic Care of Flushing | 9.8 mi | Flushing, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Kith Haven | 11.1 mi | Flint, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Briarwood Nursing and Rehabilitation | 11.8 mi | Flint, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Villa at Beecher Place | 13.2 mi | Flint, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Willowbrook Manor | 13.2 mi | Flint, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Avista Nursing and Rehabilitation | 14.9 mi | Saginaw, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Regency at Grand Blanc | 17.7 mi | Grand Blanc, MI | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Chesaning Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 19.2 mi | Chesaning, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Medilodge of Grand Blanc | 19.7 mi | Grand Blanc, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
CMS records place this facility in Genesee, MI — 15 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235518.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details