How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Pomeroy Living Rochester Skilled Rehabilitation
3500 West South Blvd, Rochester Hills, MI 48309 (opens Google Maps) · Oakland County · (248) 852-7800· 182 certified beds · avg 125 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1989 · 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 →
2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 21, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 28, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.87
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 · Aug 28, 2025 · F-0690 · triggered by a complaint
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 28, 2025 · F-0690 · triggered by a complaint
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: Sep 23, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 40 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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 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
The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. F-0881
View all 40 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 21, 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 21, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · F-0635 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | 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. · F-0658 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | 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 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Apr 21, 2026 | 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 |
| Aug 28, 2025 | ▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Aug 28, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · from a complaint · F-0773 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | 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 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · F-0838 |
| Feb 27, 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 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0761 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | 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 27, 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 |
| Feb 27, 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. · from a complaint · F-0684 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0759 |
| Feb 27, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881 |
| Oct 16, 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 |
| Oct 16, 2024 | 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 |
| Oct 16, 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 |
| Jun 26, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 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. · F-0812 |
| Mar 6, 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. · F-0804 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0558 |
| Mar 6, 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. · F-0584 |
| Mar 6, 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. · F-0658 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 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. · F-0689 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide or obtain laboratory tests when a doctor ordered them, or did not promptly report the results back to the doctor who ordered them. · F-0773 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (12 → 10).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 10
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 16 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 14 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 10 | 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: 4.87
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.52
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.42
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) | 4.87 | 4.32 | 3.95 | top 20% in Michigan; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.52 | 0.84 | 0.69 | bottom 20% in Michigan; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.42 | 3.79 | 3.50 | top 15% in Michigan; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.39 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 44% in Michigan; top 50% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 47.1 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 38% in Michigan; bottom 44% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 55.0 | 39.2 | 42.9 | bottom 21% in Michigan; bottom 28% 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 4.58, RN 0.49, weekend 4.16.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.58 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Pomeroy Living Rochester Skilled Rehabilitation. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enid Barden Family 2005 Irrevocable Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 28% | 11/01/2007 |
| Pomeroy Family Investment Partnership | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 72% | 11/01/2007 |
| Pomeroy, Keith | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | — | 11/01/2007 |
| Pomeroy, Keith | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2007 |
| Pomeroy, Keith | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/01/2007 |
All 5 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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 care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "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?"
- "Who oversees antibiotic use here, and how do you decide when an antibiotic is really needed?"
- "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
- "When a new resident arrives, how do you make sure the doctor's orders for their care and medications are in place from day one?"
- "How do you screen new residents for mental health and disability-related needs, and how do you provide the specialized services they require?"
- "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 47% 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 93 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Troy | 2.6 mi | Troy, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Optalis Health & Rehabilitation of Bloomfield Hill | 3.1 mi | Bloomfield Hills, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Woodward Hills Health and Rehabilitation Center | 3.5 mi | Bloomfield Hills, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Oakland Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center LL | 4.0 mi | Pontiac, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Bellbrook | 4.1 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Wellbridge of Rochester Hills | 4.4 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| The Springs at Rochester Hills Rehab and Nursing C | 4.7 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Regency at Troy | 5.2 mi | Troy, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Harmony Village of Clawson | 6.4 mi | Clawson, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Harmony Village of Beverly Hills | 7.3 mi | Beverly Hills, MI | —/5 | SFF | |
| Regency at Waterford | 7.3 mi | Waterford, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Greenfield Rehab and Nursing Center | 7.5 mi | Royal Oak, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Oakland, MI — 43 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- South Lyon Senior Care and Rehab Center — South Lyon, MI · overall 4/5
- The Lakeland Center — Southfield, MI · overall 1/5
- The Manor of Farmington Hills — Farmington Hills, MI · overall 2/5
- The Manor of Novi — Novi, MI · overall 1/5
- The Neighborhoods of White Lake — White Lake, MI · overall 5/5
- The Orchards at Canterbury on the Lake — Waterford, MI · overall 1/5abuse
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 235477.