Michigan ›Niles

Niles Care Center, LLC

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

911 S 3rd St, Niles, MI 49120 (opens Google Maps) · Berrien County · (269) 684-4320· 100 certified beds · avg 53 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1978 · 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: AVON HEALTHCARE (9 facilities, chain avg rating 2.2★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 23, 2026
5
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 10, 2025
$158,405
Fines, last 3 years
4.01
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 · Aug 20, 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 (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: Aug 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Aug 20, 2025 · 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: Aug 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Dec 10, 2025 · F-0697 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.

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 22, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 4, 2023 · 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 (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: Oct 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Oct 4, 2023 · F-0725 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Understaffing means longer waits for help, missed care, and higher risk of falls and other 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: Oct 24, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 41 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. 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

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · from a complaint F-0842

  3. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. F-0803

View all 41 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
Apr 17, 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. · from a complaint · F-0689
Apr 17, 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
Jan 23, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's menus did not meet residents' nutritional needs, or were not prepared in advance, followed as written, kept up to date, or reviewed by a dietician. · F-0803
Jan 23, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Jan 23, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868
Jan 23, 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. · F-0880
Jan 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 23, 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
Jan 23, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Jan 23, 2026D · 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 23, 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. · F-0842
Dec 10, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 20, 2025▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Aug 20, 2025▲ 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
Dec 5, 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
Dec 5, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Dec 5, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status. · F-0887
Dec 5, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not maintain an effective pest control program to prevent or deal with mice, insects, or other pests. · F-0925
Dec 5, 2024D · 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Oct 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Oct 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 20, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
Jun 20, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Oct 25, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Oct 25, 2023F · 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
Oct 25, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Oct 25, 2023E · 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
Oct 25, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide special eating equipment and utensils — like adaptive cups or easy-grip silverware — for residents who need them, along with appropriate help at meals. · F-0810
Oct 25, 2023D · 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
Oct 4, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, 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
Oct 4, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0725

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (11 → 9).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2024
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2026
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202382G ▲
2024180F
202543J ▲
2026110F

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 →

2 fines totaling $158,405, plus 2 Medicare payment denial periods.

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
Aug 20, 2025Fine$75,595
Dec 5, 2024Payment Denial51 days from Jan 11, 2025
Oct 4, 2023Fine$82,810
Oct 4, 2023Payment Denial28 days from Oct 26, 2023

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: 4.01
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.62
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.48
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)4.014.323.95bottom 46% in Michigan; top 39% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.620.840.69bottom 31% in Michigan; top 45% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.483.793.50bottom 41% in Michigan; top 43% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.250.490.48bottom 17% in Michigan; bottom 21% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)67.844.145.8bottom 3% in Michigan; bottom 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)90.039.242.9bottom 1% in Michigan; bottom 2% 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 3.45, RN 0.54, weekend 2.99.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.45 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Niles Care Center, LLC. 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 · changed ownership in the last 12 months

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Gottlieb, MosheIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest48%09/01/2025
Cain, CynthiaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Freund, EliyahuIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Freund, EliyahuIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Gottlieb, MosheIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Gottlieb, MosheIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Ibekie, OranuIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/03/2025
Niles Avon ManagementOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Niles Avon ManagementOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Niles Care Center PropcoOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2025
Sears, MonicaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/03/2025

All 11 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 Avon Healthcare — 9 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.

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.

  • "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?"
  • "How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
  • "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"
  • "Who reviews your menus, and can I see this week's menu and join my family member for a meal?"
  • "How do you track each resident's food allergies and preferences, and what happens if they don't like what's served?"
  • "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"

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 68% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "CMS records an ownership change here in the last 12 months — what changed for residents and staff?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 33 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
The Orchards at Niles1.6 miNiles, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
West Woods of Niles4.0 miNiles, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Healthwin Health & Rehabilitation6.1 miSouth Bend, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Majestic Care of South Bend6.4 miSouth Bend, IN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Wellbrooke of South Bend7.5 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★☆3/5
Holy Cross Rehabilitation and Wellness7.7 miSouth Bend, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Belltower Health & Rehabilitation Center8.5 miGranger, IN★★★★☆4/5
Holy Cross Village at Notre Dame INC8.6 miNotre Dame, IN★★★☆☆3/5
Creekside Village8.7 miMishawaka, IN★★★★☆3/5
Brickyard Healthcare - Fountainview Care Center8.9 miMishawaka, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Milton Home, the9.4 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★★4/5
Cardinal Nursing and Rehabilitation Center9.7 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Berrien, MI — 7 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.

All facilities in Niles →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235361.

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