How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Orchards at Lapeer
239 South Main Street, Lapeer, MI 48446 (opens Google Maps) · Lapeer County · (248) 767-6351· 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)
inspected Mar 4, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 4, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.47
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: 2/5 · 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 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Mar 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: May 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 47 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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
The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint F-0851
View all 47 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 4, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual 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 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint · F-0851 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Mar 4, 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. · F-0584 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0585 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0695 |
| Mar 4, 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 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated. · F-0807 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | 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 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0577 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0687 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | 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. · F-0690 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0732 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0803 |
| Mar 4, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0847 |
| Jan 28, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0678 |
| Jan 28, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0692 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Mar 20, 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 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0693 |
| Mar 20, 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 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · F-0755 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated. · F-0807 |
| Mar 20, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | 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 7, 2024 | ▲ 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0847 |
| May 7, 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 |
| May 7, 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 |
| May 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0644 |
| May 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0655 |
| May 7, 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 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| May 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0693 |
| May 7, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0849 |
| May 7, 2024 | C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread | 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 · F-0732 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 20).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 11
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 22
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMichigan averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 3.47
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.57
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.03
Michigan average: 3.79
U.S. average: 3.50
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) | 3.47 | 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 (%) | — | 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 3.22, RN 0.53, weekend 2.81.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.22 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 1/5.
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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for The Orchards at Lapeer. 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 - 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 |
All 9 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 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.
- The Orchards at Niles — Niles, MI · overall 1/5
- The Orchards at Northwest — Detroit, MI · overall 1/5
- The Orchards at Redford — Redford, MI · overall 1/5
- The Orchards at Roseville — Roseville, MI · overall 1/5
- The Orchards at Samaritan — Detroit, MI · overall 2/5abuse
- The Orchards at Southgate — Southgate, MI · overall 5/5
- The Orchards at Three Rivers — Three Rivers, MI · overall 1/5SFF
- The Orchards at Warren — Warren, MI · overall 1/5
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.
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?"
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?"
- "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
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 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235654.
This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).