How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Regency at Shelby Township
7401 22 Mile Road, Shelby Township, MI 48317 (opens Google Maps) · Macomb County · (586) 580-5500· 116 certified beds · avg 110 residents/day · certified since Nov 12, 2015 · 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: CIENA HEALTHCARE/LAUREL HEALTH CARE (81 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Nov 20, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jul 26, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.77
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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 · Jul 26, 2023 · F-0600
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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 26, 2023 · F-0600
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
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: Aug 16, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 25 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
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
View all 25 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 5, 2026 | 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 |
| Nov 20, 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. · F-0684 |
| Nov 20, 2025 | 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. · F-0686 |
| Nov 20, 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. · F-0761 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0550 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 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 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide proper care for residents with a colostomy, urostomy, or ileostomy — surgical openings in the abdomen that let waste leave the body into a pouch. These require regular, skilled attention to stay clean and healthy. · F-0691 |
| Sep 12, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · F-0740 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Jul 26, 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. · F-0580 |
| Jul 26, 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. · F-0684 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | 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 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | 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. · F-0804 |
| Jul 26, 2023 | 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 3).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 1
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 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 11 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 1 | 0 | D |
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: 3.77
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.72
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.19
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) | 3.77 | 4.32 | 3.95 | bottom 26% in Michigan; top 50% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.72 | 0.84 | 0.69 | bottom 45% in Michigan; top 35% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.19 | 3.79 | 3.50 | bottom 16% in Michigan; bottom 41% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.38 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 43% in Michigan; bottom 49% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 50.8 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 29% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.4 | 39.2 | 42.9 | bottom 40% in Michigan; bottom 45% 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 3.79, RN 0.72, weekend 3.20.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.79 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 3/5.
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 Regency at Shelby Township. 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 - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ciena Michigan Operations Group LLC | Organization | Direct Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2022 |
| Mohammad a Qazi Living Trust Dated 09/26/97 | Organization | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2022 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Indirect Ownership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2022 |
| Alatassi, Malaz | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Ciena Healthcare Management INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
| Ciena Healthcare Management INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/25/2025 |
| Deutsch, Neal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/07/2015 |
| Gardina, Anna | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/07/2015 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
| Khan, Anis | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
| Maze, Rebecca | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/26/2015 |
| Maze, Rebecca | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/26/2015 |
| Mohammad Qazi 2022 Children's Trust Uad 5-4-2022 | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/30/2022 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
| Qazi, Mohammad | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2015 |
All 16 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 Ciena Healthcare/Laurel Health Care — 81 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.
- Regency at St. Clair Shores — St. Clair Shores, MI · overall 4/5
- Regency at Troy — Troy, MI · overall 1/5
- Regency at Waterford — Waterford, MI · overall 1/5
- Regency at Westland — Westland, MI · overall 4/5
- Regency at Whitmore Lake — Whitmore Lake, MI · overall 1/5
- Regency Heights-Detroit — Detroit, MI · overall 3/5
- Regency on the Lake - Fort Gratiot — Fort Gratiot, MI · overall 5/5
- Royalton Manor, LLC — St Joseph, MI · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 80 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.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
- "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Can you show me the call buttons in the bathrooms and bathing areas, and tell me your average response time when one is pressed?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
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 51% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 16 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 (12 closest of 76 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regency Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 1.9 mi | Utica, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Shelby Crossing Health Campus | 2.7 mi | Shelby Townhip, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Shelby Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.7 mi | Shelby Township, MI | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lakeside Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 3.5 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | —/5 | SFF | |
| Medilodge of Shoreline | 4.2 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Wellbridge of Rochester Hills | 4.8 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Bellbrook | 5.6 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Troy | 6.0 mi | Troy, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Sterling Heig | 6.1 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Springs at Rochester Hills Rehab and Nursing C | 6.4 mi | Rochester Hills, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| Harmony Village of Clinton | 6.7 mi | Clinton Township, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Medilodge of Sterling Heights | 7.7 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
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.
- Regency at St. Clair Shores — St. Clair Shores, MI · overall 4/5
- Shorepointe Nursing Center — St. Clair Shores, MI · overall 3/5
- St. Anthony Healthcare Center — Warren, MI · overall 4/5
- The Orchards at Armada — Armada, MI · overall 5/5
- The Orchards at Roseville — Roseville, MI · overall 1/5
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 235710.