MichiganCaro

Tuscola County Medical Care Facility

1285 Cleaver Road, Caro, MI 48723 · Tuscola County · 159 certified beds · avg 135 residents/day · certified since Jan 16, 1967

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
6.49
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: 5/5

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 · Oct 27, 2023 · F-0686

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.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

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: Nov 22, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (23)

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
Dec 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.
Dec 12, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 12, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.
Dec 12, 2025D · 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.
Dec 12, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 12, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.
Oct 17, 2024F · 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.
Oct 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 17, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 17, 2024D · 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.
Oct 17, 2024D · 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.
Oct 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 17, 2024D · 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.
Oct 17, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them.
Oct 27, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Oct 27, 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.
Oct 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not safely and appropriately administer IV fluids (fluids given through a vein) for residents who needed them.
Oct 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 27, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Oct 27, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (9 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202371G ▲
202490F
202570F

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)6.494.323.95top 3% in Michigan; top 2% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.100.840.69top 20% in Michigan; top 12% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.593.793.50top 2% in Michigan; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.540.490.48top 34% in Michigan; top 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)24.544.145.8top 7% in Michigan; top 6% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)20.039.242.9top 13% in Michigan; top 13% 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 5.95, RN 1.00, weekend 5.12. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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

Government - County

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Tuscola CountyOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/18/1987
Aqil, ArshadIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/20/2006
Aqil, ArshadIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/25/2022
Boulton, AlissaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2025
Dewald, CherylIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/14/2025
Huizar, CandiIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/10/2015
Huizar, CandiIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/10/2015
McDaniel, JimmyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/18/2019
McDaniel, JimmyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/18/2019
Morris, Sue AnnIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2017
Palmer, MandyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/30/2022
Palmer, MandyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/30/2022
Rabideau, RobertIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Rabideau, RobertIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/10/2025
Root, MargaretIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE09/23/1996
Tuscola CountyOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/1957

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
Fisher Senior Care and Rehabilitation11.1 miMayville, MI★★★★★4/5
Medilodge of Cass City12.5 miCass City, MI★★★★★4/5
Marlette Community Hospital LTCU19.4 miMarlette, MI★★★★★4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Caro →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235089.