Michigan ›Troy

Regency at Troy

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

2685 West Maple Road, Troy, MI 48084 (opens Google Maps) · Oakland County · (248) 965-7900· 154 certified beds · avg 135 residents/day · certified since Apr 19, 2024 · 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★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 27, 2025
4
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 10, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.02
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: 1/5 · 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 · Jun 10, 2026 · 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: Jul 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 18, 2026 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: Apr 13, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 2, 2026 · 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: Feb 26, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 15, 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: Jun 16, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 50 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. G · Actual 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. 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. · from a complaint F-0880

  3. 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. · from a complaint F-0881

View all 50 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
Jun 10, 2026▲ 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
Jun 10, 2026F · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jun 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0881
Jun 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0657
Jun 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Mar 18, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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 18, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. · from a complaint · F-0676
Mar 18, 2026D · 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
Mar 18, 2026D · 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
Mar 18, 2026D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Mar 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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
Mar 18, 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. · from a complaint · F-0690
Mar 18, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 2, 2026▲ 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
Feb 2, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · from a complaint · F-0740
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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
Nov 20, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0690
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 20, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. · from a complaint · F-0809
Nov 20, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have doctor's orders in place for a resident's immediate care at the time the resident was admitted. · from a complaint · F-0635
Aug 21, 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 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
May 15, 2025▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint · F-0690
May 15, 2025D · 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
Mar 27, 2025F · 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
Mar 27, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 27, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Mar 27, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Mar 27, 2025E · 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
Mar 27, 2025E · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0558
Mar 27, 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. · F-0658
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0803
Mar 27, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 12, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0677
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Feb 12, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jan 29, 2025D · 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
Dec 10, 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. · from a complaint · F-0812
Dec 10, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 10, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 10, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622

Inspection trend by year

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 30
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 16
Serious citations (G–L): 3

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202440F
2025301G ▲
2026163G ▲

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 →

0 fines totaling $0, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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
May 15, 2025Payment Denial3 days from Jun 13, 2025

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: 4.02
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.68
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.45
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)4.024.323.95bottom 46% in Michigan; top 39% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.680.840.69bottom 39% in Michigan; top 38% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.453.793.50bottom 37% in Michigan; top 45% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.380.490.48bottom 42% in Michigan; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)56.344.145.8bottom 17% in Michigan; bottom 22% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)47.439.242.9bottom 32% in Michigan; bottom 40% 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 3.94, RN 0.67, weekend 3.38.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.94 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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · 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 Regency at Troy. 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 - Individual

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Mohammad a Qazi Living Trust Dated 09/26/97OrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Qazi, MohammadIndividualIndirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Ciena Healthcare Management INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/19/2024
Ciena Healthcare Management INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/24/2025
Khan, AnisIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Khan, AnisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Khan, AnisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Mohammad a Qazi Living Trust Dated 09/26/97OrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Packey, DrewIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Packey, DrewIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Peruski, BradleyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/18/2023
Peruski, BradleyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE09/18/2023
Qazi, MohammadIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Qazi, MohammadIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024
Qazi, MohammadIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2024

All 15 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.

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Who oversees antibiotic use here, and how do you decide when an antibiotic is really needed?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "What do you do daily to keep residents moving, and how do you help residents at risk of losing mobility?"
  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"

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 56% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 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 109 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Harmony Village of Clawson1.9 miClawson, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Optalis Health & Rehabilitation of Bloomfield Hill2.3 miBloomfield Hills, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Greenfield Rehab and Nursing Center2.7 miRoyal Oak, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Harmony Village of Beverly Hills3.0 miBeverly Hills, MI—/5SFF
Woodward Hills Health and Rehabilitation Center3.6 miBloomfield Hills, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Medilodge of Southfield4.3 miSouthfield, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Evergreen Health and Rehabilitation Center4.3 miSouthfield, MI★★★☆☆2/5
Pomeroy Living Sterling Skilled Rehabilitation5.0 miSterling Heights, MI★★★★☆4/5
Pomeroy Living Rochester Skilled Rehabilitation5.2 miRochester Hills, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Troy5.4 miTroy, MI★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Lahser Hills Care Centre5.8 miSouthfield, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Oakridge Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center L6.0 miFerndale, MI★★★☆☆3/5

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.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Troy →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235733.

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