The Orchards at Lapeer

Name: The Orchards at Lapeer
Address: 239 South Main Street, Lapeer, MI, 48446, US
Telephone: 2487676351

239 South Main Street, Lapeer, MI 48446 · Lapeer County · 87 certified beds · avg 65 residents/day · certified since Jul 28, 2011 · 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★)

1/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

Serious findings on record

Fines, last 3 years

3.47

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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

Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5

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 · Mar 4, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

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: Mar 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · May 7, 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: May 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (47)

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

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Mar 4, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, one-off	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
Mar 4, 2026	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	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.
Mar 4, 2026	F · Potential for harm, facility-wide	The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The 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.
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated.
Mar 4, 2026	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
Mar 4, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign.
Jan 28, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint
Jan 28, 2026	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
Mar 20, 2025	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated.
Mar 20, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
Mar 12, 2025	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
May 7, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, one-off	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
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign.
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	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.
May 7, 2024	E · Potential for harm, repeated	The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need.
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable.
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	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.
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes.
May 7, 2024	D · Potential for harm, one-off	The 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.
May 7, 2024	C · Minimal risk, facility-wide	The facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 20).

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2024	14	1	G ▲
2025	11	0	E
2026	22	1	G ▲

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)

Measure	This facility	Michigan avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.47	4.32	3.95	bottom 8% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.57	0.84	0.69	bottom 26% in Michigan; bottom 48% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.03	3.79	3.50	bottom 9% in Michigan; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.31	0.49	0.48	bottom 30% in Michigan; bottom 35% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	0.0	44.1	45.8	—
RN turnover (%)	0.0	39.2	42.9	—

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 3.22, RN 0.53, weekend 2.81. Staffing rating: 1/5.

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 / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Applefield, Michael	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Gamble, Becky	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Gutman, Isaac	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Hoffman, Alexander	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Kornfeld, Robert	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Signet Healthcare Consultants LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
Taub, Jacob	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
White Lake Healthcare LLC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024
White Lake Healthcare LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	12/31/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

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

"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
"How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
"Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
"Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
"How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
"What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
"Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Stonegate Health Campus	0.8 mi	Lapeer, MI	★★★☆☆	3/5
McLaren Lapeer Region	1.0 mi	Lapeer, MI	★★★★★	4/5
Lapeer County Medical Care Facility	1.2 mi	Lapeer, MI	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Briarwood Nursing and Rehabilitation	16.0 mi	Flint, MI	★★★☆☆	2/5
Medilodge of Grand Blanc	16.3 mi	Grand Blanc, MI	★☆☆☆☆	1/5
The Oaks at Woodfield	17.9 mi	Grand Blanc, MI	★★★★☆	3/5
Lake Orion Nursing Center	18.7 mi	Lake Orion, MI	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Regency at Grand Blanc	19.4 mi	Grand Blanc, MI	★★★★★	3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Lapeer →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235654.

The Care File

Visit checklist — The Orchards at Lapeer

239 South Main Street, Lapeer, MI 48446 · 2487676351

Health inspection rating 1/5 · CMS overall 2/5· Fines (3y): $0

Most serious findings on record:

▲ Mar 4, 2026 (F-0684, Actual harm, one-off): The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
▲ May 7, 2024 (F-0689, Actual harm, one-off): The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Questions for the administrator:

☐ "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
☐ "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
☐ "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
☐ "Walk me through what happens when a resident or family files a grievance — who responds and how fast?"
☐ "How many residents here use oxygen or breathing equipment, and who checks that equipment each shift?"
☐ "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
☐ "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"

While you're there, notice:

☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)

Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 235654 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)