Michigan ›Rochester Hills

Wellbridge of Rochester Hills

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

252 Meadowfield Drive, Rochester Hills, MI 48307 (opens Google Maps) · Oakland County · (248) 218-4800· 100 certified beds · avg 95 residents/day · certified since Dec 28, 2015 · 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 →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)

What the abuse flag means →

Part of chain: THE WELLBRIDGE GROUP (8 facilities, chain avg rating 3.5★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Dec 11, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 11, 2024
$22,523
Fines, last 3 years
4.24
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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 · Sep 11, 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: Sep 30, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Aug 3, 2023 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

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): 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: Aug 30, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 32 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint F-0610

  2. 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

  3. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    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. · from a complaint F-0686

View all 32 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
May 26, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
May 26, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 14, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Apr 14, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Apr 14, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0609
Dec 11, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0578
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Dec 11, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685
Sep 25, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jun 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561
Jun 4, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 14, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 12, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Sep 11, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Sep 11, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Jul 16, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Jul 16, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Apr 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 15, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility admitted a resident without a doctor's order, or did not make sure each resident stayed under a doctor's ongoing care. · from a complaint · F-0710
Feb 7, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. · from a complaint · F-0755
Aug 3, 2023▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0686
Aug 3, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. · from a complaint · F-0554
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0558
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint · F-0623
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · from a complaint · F-0645
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0658
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Aug 3, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 4).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023101G ▲
202481G ▲
202590E
202650E

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)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $22,523.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Sep 11, 2024Fine$22,523

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMichigan averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.24
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.70
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.85
Michigan average: 3.79
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMichigan avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.244.323.95top 42% in Michigan; top 31% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.700.840.69bottom 43% in Michigan; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.853.793.50top 34% in Michigan; top 28% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.320.490.48bottom 33% in Michigan; bottom 36% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)52.344.145.8bottom 25% in Michigan; bottom 31% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.039.242.9bottom 32% in Michigan; bottom 39% in the U.S.

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 3.68, RN 0.61, weekend 3.33.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.68 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · 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 Wellbridge of Rochester Hills. 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 - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
E2g, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%01/25/2012
Perry, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest5%01/01/2016
Senior Care Equities No 16 LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%12/04/2012
Wronski, FrankIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%12/04/2012
Nexcare Health Systems, LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2016
Sangster, ToddIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/01/2016
Tolliver, DonaldIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE02/19/2018

All 7 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 Wellbridge Group — 8 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.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 52% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 81 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Bellbrook0.9 miRochester Hills, MI★★★★★5/5
The Springs at Rochester Hills Rehab and Nursing C1.9 miRochester Hills, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Optalis Health and Rehabilitation of Troy2.8 miTroy, MI★★☆☆☆1/5abuse
Pomeroy Living Rochester Skilled Rehabilitation4.4 miRochester Hills, MI★★☆☆☆2/5
Regency at Shelby Township4.8 miShelby Township, MI★★★★☆4/5
Regency Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center5.5 miUtica, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Optalis Health & Rehabilitation of Bloomfield Hill7.0 miBloomfield Hills, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Oakland Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center LL7.2 miPontiac, MI★★★☆☆3/5
Shelby Health and Rehabilitation Center7.4 miShelby Township, MI★★★★☆3/5
Shelby Crossing Health Campus7.4 miShelby Townhip, MI★★★★★5/5
Woodward Hills Health and Rehabilitation Center7.9 miBloomfield Hills, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Lakeside Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation Center7.9 miSterling Heights, MI—/5SFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Oakland, MI — 43 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.

All facilities in Rochester Hills →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235716.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details