How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Medilodge of Sterling Heights
14151 East 15 Mile Road, Sterling Heights, MI 48312 (opens Google Maps) · Macomb County · (586) 939-0200· 248 certified beds · avg 210 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1976 · 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★)
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 14, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 19, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.08
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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 · Feb 19, 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 19, 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: Dec 28, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 51 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. F-0804
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
The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. F-0584
View all 51 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · F-0584 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Apr 14, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Dec 18, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0688 |
| Jun 30, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide bedrooms with required basics: a window to the outside, a room at or above ground level, adequate bedding, furniture that fits the resident's needs, or enough closet space. · from a complaint · F-0917 |
| Apr 14, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · from a complaint · F-0644 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. · from a complaint · F-0687 |
| Mar 12, 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0761 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Feb 19, 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 |
| Jan 22, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Oct 22, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide at least one adequately sized room for dining and activities, with good lighting, airflow, and furniture. · from a complaint · F-0920 |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Jun 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0551 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · F-0600 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 1, 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 1, 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. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697 |
| Feb 1, 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 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0761 |
| Feb 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0656 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | 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 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0686 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · from a complaint · F-0806 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Oct 2, 2023 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 6).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 21
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 8 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 21 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 16 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 6 | 0 | F |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMichigan averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.08
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.44
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.47
Michigan average: 3.79
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 4.08 | 4.32 | 3.95 | bottom 50% in Michigan; top 36% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.44 | 0.84 | 0.69 | bottom 14% in Michigan; bottom 29% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.47 | 3.79 | 3.50 | bottom 40% in Michigan; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.19 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 8% in Michigan; bottom 10% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 54.1 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 21% in Michigan; bottom 27% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 62.1 | 39.2 | 42.9 | bottom 13% in Michigan; bottom 19% 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 3.74, RN 0.41, weekend 3.18.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.74 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 2/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Medilodge of Sterling Heights. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B&y Healthcare S Corp | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/24/2013 |
| B&y Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/24/2013 |
| Cody Healthcare S Corp | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/24/2013 |
| Craig Flashner 2007 Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/24/2013 |
| Fifteeninone Opco Group LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 06/24/2013 |
| Flashner, Craig | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2013 |
| Generations Healthcare Management LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2013 |
| Kirk, Kristine | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Norcross, Robert | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2013 |
| Perlstein, Yitzchok | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/24/2013 |
| Prestige Administrative Services, LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2016 |
| Rogers, Stacey | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/20/2014 |
All 12 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.
- Medilodge of Tawas City — Tawas City, MI · overall 3/5
- Medilodge of Taylor — Taylor, MI · overall 3/5
- Medilodge of Traverse City — Traverse City, MI · overall 4/5
- Medilodge of West Bloomfield — West Bloomfield, MI · overall 2/5
- Medilodge of Westwood — Kalamazoo, MI · overall 1/5
- Medilodge of Wyoming — Wyoming, MI · overall 5/5
- Medilodge of Yale — Yale, MI · overall 5/5
- Medilodge of Zeeland — Zeeland, MI · overall 3/5
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
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?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Who on your staff manages IV therapy, and what training and monitoring is in place?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
- "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 54% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
Nearby facilities (12 closest of 78 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Sterling Heig | 1.6 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Fraser Villa | 1.7 mi | Fraser, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Harmony Village of Clinton | 2.7 mi | Clinton Township, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Windemere Park Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.9 mi | Warren, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Autumn Woods Residential Health | 3.0 mi | Warren, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Orchards at Warren | 3.3 mi | Warren, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| St. Anthony Healthcare Center | 4.7 mi | Warren, MI | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Medilodge of Shoreline | 4.7 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lakeside Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 4.7 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | —/5 | SFF | |
| Harmony Village of Warren | 5.0 mi | Warren, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| The Villa at City Center | 5.0 mi | Warren, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Pomeroy Living Sterling Skilled Rehabilitation | 5.1 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Macomb, MI — 30 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Michigan Veterans Home of Chesterfield Township — Chesterfield Township, MI · overall 5/5
- Orchard Grove Health Campus — Romeo, MI · overall 5/5
- Regency at Shelby Township — Shelby Township, MI · overall 4/5
- Regency at St. Clair Shores — St. Clair Shores, MI · overall 4/5
- Regency Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center — Utica, MI · overall 2/5
- Shelby Crossing Health Campus — Shelby Townhip, MI · overall 5/5
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 235263.