MichiganDetroit

The Orchards at Northwest

16181 Hubbell St, Detroit, MI 48235 · Wayne County · 154 certified beds · avg 116 residents/day · certified since Sep 2, 1993

Part of chain: THE ORCHARDS MICHIGAN (15 facilities, chain avg rating 1.9★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
3
Serious findings on record
$15,889
Fines, last 3 years
3.77
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: 1/5

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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Feb 21, 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): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.

Corrected: Feb 2, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 23, 2026 · 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: Jan 24, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 23, 2026 · F-0726 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident.

Why it matters: Undertrained caregivers are more likely to miss warning signs and make care mistakes.

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

All citations in the current public record (43)

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
Mar 10, 2026F · 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 10, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.
Mar 10, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 10, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Mar 10, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Mar 10, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 23, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jan 23, 2026▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 8, 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.
Jan 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Jan 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective.
Jan 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program.
Jan 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not educate residents and staff about COVID-19 vaccination, offer the vaccine to those eligible after that education, or properly document everyone's vaccination status.
Jan 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Jan 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint
Jan 8, 2025D · 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 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jan 8, 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.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's bedrooms did not give residents visual privacy — such as curtains or dividers — when privacy is needed. · from a complaint
Mar 21, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 21, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Nov 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · from a complaint
Nov 28, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 18, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not make sure its nurse aides had the skills needed to care for residents, including training in dementia care and abuse prevention.
Oct 18, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Oct 18, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Oct 18, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · from a complaint
Oct 18, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 18, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (19 → 11).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202380F
202421J ▲
2025200F
2026132G ▲

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)

1 fine totaling $15,889.

DateTypeAmount / length
Feb 21, 2024Fine$15,889

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)3.774.323.95bottom 26% in Michigan; bottom 50% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.230.840.69bottom 2% in Michigan; bottom 4% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.303.793.50bottom 26% in Michigan; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.160.490.48bottom 5% in Michigan; bottom 6% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)0.044.145.8
RN turnover (%)0.039.242.9

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 3.62, RN 0.22, weekend 3.17. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Gutman, IsaacIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest06/01/2022
Hoffman, AlexanderIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest06/01/2022
Kornfeld, RobertIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest06/01/2022
Mi Opco Holdco LLCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest05/01/2022
Northwest Opco Holdco LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%06/01/2022
Taub, JacobIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest06/01/2022
Dumas, AlexandreIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2022
Kornfeld, RobertIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2022
Moss, KarenIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE06/01/2022

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
Westwood Nursing Center0.5 miDetroit, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Sheffield Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center0.7 miDetroit, MI★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Hartford Nursing & Rehabilitation Center0.7 miDetroit, MI★★★☆☆2/5
Oakpointe Senior Care and Rehab Center1.6 miDetroit, MI★★★★★5/5
The Villa at Great Lakes Crossing2.4 miDetroit, MI★★☆☆☆3/5
Regency Heights-Detroit2.4 miDetroit, MI★★★☆☆3/5
West Oaks Senior Care & Rehab Center3.3 miDetroit, MI★★★★★5/5
Fairlane Senior Care and Rehab Center3.6 miDetroit, MI★★★★☆4/5
Heritage Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center4.1 miDetroit, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Beaconshire Nursing Centre4.1 miDetroit, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
The Villa at the Park4.5 miHighland Park, MI★★★☆☆2/5abuse
Medilodge of Southfield5.4 miSouthfield, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Detroit →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235539.