MichiganShelby Township

Regency at Shelby Township

7401 22 Mile Road, Shelby Township, MI 48317 · Macomb County · 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)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.77
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Aug 16, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (25)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 5, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Sep 12, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety.
Jul 26, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 26, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jul 26, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jul 26, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Jul 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (11 → 3).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023101G ▲
2024110F
202530D
202610D

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)

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityMichigan avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.774.323.95bottom 26% in Michigan; top 50% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.720.840.69bottom 45% in Michigan; top 35% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.193.793.50bottom 16% in Michigan; bottom 41% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.490.48bottom 43% in Michigan; bottom 49% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)50.844.145.8bottom 29% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)44.439.242.9bottom 40% in Michigan; bottom 45% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.79, RN 0.72, weekend 3.20. Staffing rating: 3/5.

Self-reported quality measures

Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.

Quality measures rating: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ciena Michigan Operations Group LLCOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2022
Mohammad a Qazi Living Trust Dated 09/26/97OrganizationIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2022
Qazi, MohammadIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2022
Alatassi, MalazIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Ciena Healthcare Management INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015
Ciena Healthcare Management INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/25/2025
Deutsch, NealIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/07/2015
Gardina, AnnaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/07/2015
Khan, AnisIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015
Khan, AnisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015
Khan, AnisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015
Maze, RebeccaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/26/2015
Maze, RebeccaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/26/2015
Mohammad Qazi 2022 Children's Trust Uad 5-4-2022OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/30/2022
Qazi, MohammadIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015
Qazi, MohammadIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/12/2015

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Regency Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center1.9 miUtica, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Shelby Crossing Health Campus2.7 miShelby Townhip, MI★★★★★5/5
Shelby Health and Rehabilitation Center2.7 miShelby Township, MI★★★★☆3/5
Lakeside Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center3.5 miSterling Heights, MI—/5SFF
Medilodge of Shoreline4.2 miSterling Heights, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Wellbridge of Rochester Hills4.8 miRochester Hills, MI★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Bellbrook5.6 miRochester Hills, MI★★★★★5/5
Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Troy6.0 miTroy, MI★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Sterling Heig6.1 miSterling Heights, MI★★★☆☆2/5
The Springs at Rochester Hills Rehab and Nursing C6.4 miRochester Hills, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Harmony Village of Clinton6.7 miClinton Township, MI★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Medilodge of Sterling Heights7.7 miSterling Heights, MI★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Shelby Township →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235710.