Michigan ›Niles

West Woods of Niles

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

1211 State Line Rd, Niles, MI 49120 (opens Google Maps) · Berrien County · (269) 684-2810· 121 certified beds · avg 107 residents/day · certified since Jul 13, 2000 · 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 PEPLINSKI GROUP (10 facilities, chain avg rating 2.1★)

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 10, 2026
5
Serious findings on record
most recent Feb 10, 2026
$16,800
Fines, last 3 years
4.17
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: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Feb 10, 2026 · 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 (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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 9, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Nov 19, 2025 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

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: Dec 4, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 3, 2024 · 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: Jul 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 3, 2024 · 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: Jul 26, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 14, 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: Apr 10, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 41 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. J · Immediate jeopardy, 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. · from a complaint F-0686

  2. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. F-0730

  3. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. F-0804

View all 41 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
Feb 10, 2026▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not observe each nurse aide's job performance or provide regular training as required. · F-0730
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Feb 10, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Feb 10, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Feb 10, 2026D · 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
Feb 10, 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. · F-0609
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · F-0627
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Feb 10, 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
Feb 10, 2026D · 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. · F-0689
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Feb 10, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757
Dec 10, 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
Dec 10, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 19, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Jan 9, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Jan 9, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882
Jan 9, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0887
Jan 9, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Jan 9, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jan 9, 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
Jan 9, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. · F-0868
Jul 3, 2024▲ G · Actual 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
Jul 3, 2024▲ 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
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 3, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 14, 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
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0550
Feb 1, 2024D · 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
Nov 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0656
Nov 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677
Nov 29, 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. · F-0689
Nov 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Nov 29, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (6 → 18).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 3
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 18
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202360D
202473G ▲
2025101G ▲
2026181J ▲

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 →

2 fines totaling $16,800, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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
Feb 10, 2026Payment Denial34 days from Mar 10, 2026
Jul 3, 2024Fine$8,400
Jul 3, 2024Fine$8,400

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: 4.17
Michigan average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 0.61
Michigan average: 0.84
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.75
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)4.174.323.95top 45% in Michigan; top 33% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.610.840.69bottom 29% in Michigan; top 47% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.753.793.50top 39% in Michigan; top 31% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.300.490.48bottom 27% in Michigan; bottom 31% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)38.144.145.8top 32% in Michigan; top 31% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)25.039.242.9top 23% in Michigan; top 20% 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 3.92, RN 0.57, weekend 3.53.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.92 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · 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 West Woods of Niles. 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 / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Ackerman, AmyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Baumgarten, MichaelIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Baumgarten, ThereseIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Peplinski, SheliIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Peplinski, ToddIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Schade, JefferyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Schade, TamaraIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Thompson, BrianIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Thompson, ShellyIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest10%01/01/2012
Ackerman, AmyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Ackerman, RickyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Baumgarten, MichaelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Baumgarten, ThereseIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Peplinski, SheliIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Peplinski, ToddIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Peplinski, ToddIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012
Peplinski, ToddIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2012

Showing 20 of 40 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 20 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain The Peplinski Group — 10 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. Showing 8 of the 9 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

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.

  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "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?"
  • "How often do you evaluate your nurse aides and what ongoing training do they receive?"
  • "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "How do you keep residents' medical records accurate, complete, and secure?"

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 38% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 40 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 30 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Healthwin Health & Rehabilitation2.3 miSouth Bend, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Majestic Care of South Bend2.7 miSouth Bend, IN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Wellbrooke of South Bend3.5 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★☆3/5
Holy Cross Rehabilitation and Wellness4.0 miSouth Bend, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Niles Care Center, LLC4.0 miNiles, MI★★☆☆☆1/5
Holy Cross Village at Notre Dame INC4.6 miNotre Dame, IN★★★☆☆3/5
Brickyard Healthcare - Fountainview Care Center5.2 miMishawaka, IN★★☆☆☆2/5
Belltower Health & Rehabilitation Center5.4 miGranger, IN★★★★☆4/5
Milton Home, the5.4 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★★4/5
The Orchards at Niles5.5 miNiles, MI★☆☆☆☆1/5
Creekside Village5.5 miMishawaka, IN★★★★☆3/5
Cardinal Nursing and Rehabilitation Center5.7 miSouth Bend, IN★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Berrien, MI — 7 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 Niles →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 235594.

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