Medilodge of Ludington
1000 East Tinkham Avenue, Ludington, MI 49431 · Mason County · 93 certified beds · avg 82 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1980
Part of chain: MEDILODGE (53 facilities, chain avg rating 3.1★)
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 · Mar 11, 2026 · 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: Apr 6, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 29, 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: Sep 25, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 18, 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: May 15, 2025 (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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 24, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jun 24, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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 |
| Mar 11, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 11, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Mar 11, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| Mar 11, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have enough staff with the right skills to meet the mental and behavioral health needs of its residents, such as those living with dementia or depression. · from a complaint |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. |
| Mar 11, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. |
| Aug 29, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 9, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Apr 18, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Apr 18, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. |
| Feb 13, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 25, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Sep 25, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| Sep 25, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 25, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jul 9, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint |
| Jul 9, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jan 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jan 24, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jan 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. |
| Oct 19, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 10).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 1 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 13 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 7 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 12 | 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.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
1 fine totaling $40,404.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2025 | Fine | $40,404 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Michigan avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.14 | 4.32 | 3.95 | top 46% in Michigan; top 34% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.62 | 0.84 | 0.69 | top 5% in Michigan; top 4% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.30 | 3.79 | 3.50 | bottom 25% in Michigan; bottom 47% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.93 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 7% in Michigan; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 48.4 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 35% in Michigan; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.9 | 39.2 | 42.9 | top 25% in Michigan; top 23% 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 3.94, RN 1.54, weekend 3.13. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B&y Healthcare S Corp | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/01/2018 |
| B&y Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/01/2018 |
| Cody Healthcare S Corp | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/01/2018 |
| Craig Flashner 2007 Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 02/01/2018 |
| Everest Opco Group LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 02/01/2018 |
| Blossom Healthcare Management LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Flashner, Craig | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Flashner, Craig | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Kirk, Kristine | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Norcross, Robert | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Perlstein, Yitzchok | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Perlstein, Yitzchok | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Prestige Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
| Rogers, Stacey | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/01/2018 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
- "What training does your staff have in dementia and behavioral health, and how many residents with these needs do you serve?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "How do you involve a resident's representative in care decisions, and how quickly are they consulted?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oakview Medical Care Facility | 0.4 mi | Ludington, MI | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Oceana County Medical Care Facility | 18.4 mi | Hart, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 2 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235358.