MichiganBattle Creek

The Oaks at Battle Creek

706 North Avenue, Battle Creek, MI 49017 · Calhoun County · 77 certified beds · avg 69 residents/day · certified since Jun 10, 1986

Part of chain: TRILOGY HEALTH SERVICES (123 facilities, chain avg rating 4.2★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.89
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · 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.

All citations in the current public record (21)

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
Jun 5, 2026D · Potential for 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. · from a complaint
Mar 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Mar 12, 2025F · 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.
Mar 12, 2025E · 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.
Mar 12, 2025D · 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.
Mar 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered.
Mar 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Mar 12, 2025D · 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.
Mar 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Mar 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 18, 2024F · 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.
Apr 18, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not arrange hospice services for a resident who needed them, or help the resident move to a facility that could arrange hospice. Hospice provides comfort-focused care for people nearing the end of life.
Sep 19, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not inform residents of their visitation rights or did not treat all visitors equally. Residents have the right to receive the visitors they choose. · from a complaint
Jan 25, 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.
Jan 25, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Jan 25, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jan 25, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 25, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 25, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 25, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults.
Jan 25, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 9).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202390F
202420F
202590F
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)3.894.323.95bottom 34% in Michigan; top 44% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.920.840.69top 31% in Michigan; top 20% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.673.793.50top 44% in Michigan; top 35% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.820.490.48top 11% in Michigan; top 11% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)23.144.145.8top 5% in Michigan; top 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)7.739.242.9top 4% in Michigan; top 3% 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 4.17, RN 0.99, weekend 3.93. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Continental Merger Sub LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/01/2021
Northstar Healthcare Income INCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/01/2021
Northstar Healthcare Income Operating Partnership LPOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/01/2021
Trilogy Holdings Nt-Hci, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10/01/2021
Barney, LeighIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2019
Conner, GregoryIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/03/2021
Corbin, KathyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/11/2011
Davis, DavidIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/21/2017
Fightmaster, LisaIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2015
Keybank National AssociationOrganization5% or Greater Mortgage InterestNOT APPLICABLE05/01/2016
Mehaffey, ToddIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/31/2022
Pietrowski, CristinaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/31/2022
Prosky, DannyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2015
Smith, AubreyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2021
Trilogy Management Services LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2021
Willhite, GabrielIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE08/15/2023

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
Majestic Care of Battle Creek0.2 miBattle Creek, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Pinnacle Care of Battle Creek1.8 miBattle Creek, MI★★☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
The Laurels of Bedford2.6 miBattle Creek, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Calhoun County Medical Care Facility3.6 miBattle Creek, MI★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse
Evergreen Manor Senior Care Center4.5 miBattle Creek, MI★★★★☆4/5
Marshall Nursing and Rehabilitation Community12.1 miMarshall, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Medilodge of Marshall13.0 miMarshall, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
The Laurels of Galesburg13.0 miGalesburg, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Villa at Borgess Place18.5 miKalamazoo, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Thornapple Manor19.1 miHastings, MI★★★★★4/5
Plainwell Pines Nursing and Rehabilitation Communi19.4 miPlainwell, MI★★☆☆☆1/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Battle Creek →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235451.