Michigan ›Traverse City

Medilodge of GTC

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

2950 Lafranier Road, Traverse City, MI 49686 (opens Google Maps) · Grand Traverse County · (231) 947-0506· 125 certified beds · avg 107 residents/day · certified since Jun 1, 1975 · 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: MEDILODGE (53 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 4, 2026
6
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 4, 2026
$69,430
Fines, last 3 years
4.56
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · 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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jan 7, 2026 · F-0678 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes.

Why it matters: In a cardiac or breathing emergency, failure to start CPR promptly can be the difference between life and death.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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 3, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 20, 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Jun 6, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 4, 2026 · F-0686

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: Mar 28, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, pattern · Oct 24, 2025 · F-0880 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Weak infection control lets illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and drug-resistant infections spread quickly among vulnerable residents.

Severity (H): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Nov 20, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 24, 2025 · F-0627 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely.

Why it matters: A rushed or poorly planned move can leave a resident somewhere that can't meet their needs.

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: Nov 20, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 6, 2024 · F-0686

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

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 33 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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. · from a complaint F-0684

  2. 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. F-0686

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0812

View all 33 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
Jun 30, 2026D · 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 4, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 4, 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. · from a complaint · F-0812
Mar 4, 2026E · 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 4, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Mar 4, 2026D · 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. · F-0684
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Mar 4, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Mar 4, 2026D · 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
Jan 7, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint · F-0678
Jan 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0578
Jan 7, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint · F-0842
Oct 24, 2025▲ H · Actual harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Oct 24, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Oct 24, 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
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · F-0554
Jan 30, 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. · F-0684
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 30, 2025D · 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
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 20, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
May 20, 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, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 6, 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 6, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584
Mar 6, 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 6, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Mar 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide appropriate treatment and services to residents with a mental health condition, difficulty adjusting emotionally, or a history of trauma or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). · F-0742
Mar 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Mar 6, 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 11).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2025
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2026
All citations: 15
Serious citations (G–L): 2

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024102J ▲
202582H ▲
2026152J ▲

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 →

1 fine totaling $69,430.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
May 17, 2024Fine$69,430

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: 4.56
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.40
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.59
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)4.564.323.95top 27% in Michigan; top 21% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.400.840.69top 10% in Michigan; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.593.793.50bottom 50% in Michigan; top 38% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.580.490.48top 29% in Michigan; top 25% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)40.244.145.8top 37% in Michigan; top 37% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)28.639.242.9top 29% in Michigan; top 26% 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 3.77, RN 1.16, weekend 2.97.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.77 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Medilodge of GTC. 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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
B&y Healthcare S CorpOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2018
B&y TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2018
Cody Healthcare S CorpOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2018
Craig Flashner 2007 TrustOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest—02/01/2018
Everest Opco Group LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%02/01/2018
Blossom Healthcare Management LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Flashner, CraigIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Flashner, CraigIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Kirk, KristineIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Norcross, RobertIndividualContracted Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Perlstein, YitzchokIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Perlstein, YitzchokIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Prestige Administrative Services, LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018
Rogers, StaceyIndividualContracted Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2018

All 14 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 Medilodge — 53 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 52 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.

  • "Are staff on every shift trained and certified in CPR, and how do they know each resident's resuscitation wishes?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"

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 40% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 14 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Medilodge of Traverse City0.4 miTraverse City, MI★★★★☆3/5
The Villa at Traverse Point1.3 miTraverse City, MI★★★★★4/5
Grand Traverse Pavilions2.6 miTraverse City, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Orchard Creek Skilled Nursing5.4 miTraverse City, MI★★★★☆2/5abuse
Maple Valley Nursing Home15.8 miMaple Valley, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Medilodge of Leelanau16.8 miSuttons Bay, MI★★★★☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Traverse City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235243.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

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