26900 Franklin Road, Southfield, MI 48034 (opens Google Maps) · Oakland County · (248) 350-8070· 91 certified beds · avg 87 residents/day · certified since Mar 4, 1999 · 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: OPTALIS HEALTH & REHABILITATION (36 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
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.
▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · May 29, 2024 · 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: May 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 2, 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 (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 17, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Showing the latest 3 of 43 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0600
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. · from a complaint F-0725
The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint F-0726
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| May 6, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · F-0865 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | 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 11, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not have a compliance and ethics program — an internal system designed to prevent and catch violations of the law and ethical standards. · F-0895 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0677 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not allow a resident's chosen representative — often a family member or someone with power of attorney — to exercise the resident's rights on their behalf. When a resident can't speak for themselves, their representative steps into that role. · F-0551 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · F-0610 |
| Feb 11, 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 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · from a complaint · F-0730 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · F-0745 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883 |
| Feb 11, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention. · from a complaint · F-0947 |
| Aug 19, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0919 |
| Jul 2, 2025 | ▲ 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 |
| Jul 2, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0690 |
| Apr 3, 2025 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Nov 19, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · from a complaint · F-0725 |
| Nov 19, 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 |
| Nov 19, 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 |
| Nov 19, 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 |
| Nov 19, 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 |
| Nov 19, 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 |
| Nov 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure the resident's doctor reviewed their care and wrote, signed, and dated progress notes and orders at each required visit. · F-0711 |
| Nov 19, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 19, 2024 | 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. · F-0759 |
| Nov 19, 2024 | 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 |
| Jul 1, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| May 29, 2024 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0727 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0921 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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. · from a complaint · F-0600 |
| Jan 31, 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 |
| Jan 31, 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 |
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 19).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 18 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2025 | 4 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 21 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $15,926.
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.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2024 | Fine | $15,926 |
What these staffing numbers mean →
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) | 3.61 | 4.32 | 3.95 | bottom 15% in Michigan; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.55 | 0.84 | 0.69 | bottom 23% in Michigan; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.28 | 3.79 | 3.50 | bottom 24% in Michigan; bottom 46% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.29 | 0.49 | 0.48 | bottom 26% in Michigan; bottom 31% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 62.4 | 44.1 | 45.8 | bottom 8% in Michigan; bottom 13% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 72.7 | 39.2 | 42.9 | bottom 5% in Michigan; bottom 9% 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 3.69, RN 0.56, weekend 3.35.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.69 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 2/5.
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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Lakeland Center. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.
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.
Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enid Barden Trust | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 9% | 12/23/1987 |
| Patel, Pinal | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 30% | 07/15/2013 |
| Pomeroy Delaware Investments #2, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 31% | 12/23/1987 |
| Reh 1 Corporation | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 12/23/1987 |
| Shah, Nayana | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 30% | 07/15/2013 |
| Cliftonlarsonallen LLP | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Coca Soto, Doris | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Coca Soto, Doris | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/03/2025 |
| Conner, Marianne | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/13/2024 |
| Dunn, Charles | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/03/2025 |
| Enid Barden Trust | Organization | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/23/1987 |
| Enid Barden Trust | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/23/1987 |
| Ferguson, Damita | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Lakeland Ventures LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/23/1987 |
| Lakeland Victory Holdings LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/23/1987 |
| Optum Management Solutions. INC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1998 |
| Optum Management Solutions. INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1998 |
| Patel, Pinal | Individual | Limited Partnership Interest | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/15/2013 |
| Patel, Pinal | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/15/2013 |
| Patel, Rajan | Individual | Managing Control - Governing Body | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/1998 |
Showing 20 of 32 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 12 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
CMS lists this facility under the chain Optalis Health & Rehabilitation — 36 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 35 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lahser Hills Care Centre | 1.5 mi | Southfield, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Evergreen Health and Rehabilitation Center | 3.0 mi | Southfield, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Beaconshire Nursing Centre | 3.6 mi | Detroit, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Manor of Farmington Hills | 3.7 mi | Farmington Hills, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Corewell Health Rehab & Nursing Center-Commons Far | 3.9 mi | Farmington Hills, MI | ★★★★☆ | 2/5 | |
| Medilodge of Livonia | 3.9 mi | Livonia, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Harmony Village of Beverly Hills | 4.0 mi | Beverly Hills, MI | —/5 | SFF | |
| The Orchards at Redford | 4.4 mi | Redford, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Medilodge of Southfield | 4.5 mi | Southfield, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| Greenfield Rehab and Nursing Center | 4.8 mi | Royal Oak, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuse |
| West Oaks Senior Care & Rehab Center | 4.8 mi | Detroit, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Medilodge of Farmington | 5.0 mi | Farmington, MI | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | SFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235589.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details