22600 Armada Ridge Road, Armada, MI 48005 (opens Google Maps) · Macomb County · (586) 784-5322· 67 certified beds · avg 64 residents/day · certified since Jun 25, 2003 · 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: THE ORCHARDS MICHIGAN (15 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)
New to these records? How to read an inspection report →
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 · Dec 19, 2023 · 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: Nov 7, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)
Showing the latest 3 of 17 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaint F-0688
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. · from a complaint F-0580
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. F-0550
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 6, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0688 |
| Feb 25, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0580 |
| Jun 10, 2025 | 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. · F-0550 |
| Jun 10, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them. · F-0694 |
| Jun 10, 2025 | 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 |
| May 23, 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. · from a complaint · F-0812 |
| May 23, 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 23, 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 |
| May 23, 2024 | 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 |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 23, 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. · from a complaint · F-0759 |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure special medical diets — like low-sodium or diabetic diets — were properly ordered by the resident's doctor or managed by a qualified dietitian as state law allows. · from a complaint · F-0808 |
| May 23, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Dec 19, 2023 | ▲ 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 |
| May 9, 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 |
| May 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 3).
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2024 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 2 | 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.
How to file a complaint about care →
1 fine totaling $15,887.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2023 | Fine | $15,887 |
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) | 3.56 | 4.32 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in Michigan; bottom 40% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.69 | top 44% in Michigan; top 26% 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) | 0.59 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 28% in Michigan; top 24% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | — | 44.1 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | — | 39.2 | 42.9 | — |
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 3.18, RN 0.73, weekend 2.85.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.18 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Orchards at Armada. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Armada Opco Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 06/01/2022 |
| Gutman, Isaac | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Hoffman, Alexander | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Kornfeld, Robert | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Mi Opco Holdco LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Taub, Jacob | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | — | 06/01/2022 |
| Fisherman, Zalman | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Henrikson, Donald | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
| Kornfeld, Robert | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/01/2022 |
All 9 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
CMS lists this facility under the chain The Orchards Michigan — 15 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 14 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wellbridge of Romeo | 6.8 mi | Romeo, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Medilodge of Richmond | 6.9 mi | Richmond, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Orchard Grove Health Campus | 7.0 mi | Romeo, MI | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| The Village of East Harbor | 13.3 mi | Chesterfield Township, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Michigan Veterans Home of Chesterfield Township | 13.7 mi | Chesterfield Township, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Shelby Crossing Health Campus | 14.7 mi | Shelby Townhip, MI | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Regency at Shelby Township | 14.9 mi | Shelby Township, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Shelby Health and Rehabilitation Center | 15.1 mi | Shelby Township, MI | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Martha T Berry MCF | 15.6 mi | Mount Clemems, MI | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Medilodge of Shoreline | 15.8 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lakeside Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center | 16.0 mi | Sterling Heights, MI | —/5 | SFF | |
| Regency Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center | 16.4 mi | Utica, MI | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
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.
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 235609.
May we use Google Analytics cookies to measure visits and pages viewed? Optional — every feature works without them. Privacy details