Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
A standard survey is most likely before around November 2026
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Lakepointe Senior Care And Rehabilitation Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A deficiency was identified in a facility where call lights were consistently out of reach for several residents, including those with cognitive impairments and physical limitations. Observations showed call lights on the floor or hanging on walls, contrary to facility policy. Staff interviews confirmed the expectation for call lights to be within reach, yet this was not maintained.
A facility failed to maintain the dignity of a legally blind resident with Heart Failure and Dementia by posting a sign above their bed stating "He is a feeder." The resident was unaware of the sign, and the DON was not informed of its presence. The facility did not provide a specific policy on resident dignity but referenced a document on residents' rights.
The facility failed to implement care plan interventions for three residents, leading to deficiencies in their care. A resident experienced multiple falls without a follow-up medication review. Another resident was observed without required heel protector boots and with an inaccessible call light. Similarly, a third resident had only one heel protector on and an out-of-reach call light, indicating a lack of adherence to care plans.
A resident with Heart Failure, Dementia, and legal blindness had their water cup consistently placed out of reach, contrary to care plan instructions. Observations over three days confirmed the issue, and the care plan lacked specific guidance on water access and assistance. The DON acknowledged the oversight, which contradicted the facility's policy on care plan revisions.
The facility failed to reposition two dependent residents timely, leading to a deficiency in care. One resident, totally dependent due to severe cognitive impairment and other medical conditions, was observed in the same position over two days without repositioning, despite a care plan requiring assistance. Another resident, needing substantial assistance due to dementia and heart failure, was also observed in the same position for extended periods. The facility's policy lacked a specific timeframe for repositioning, contributing to the deficiency.
A resident with cognitive impairment and a diagnosis of cerebral infarction was not administered PEG tube feeding according to physician's orders. The feeding was observed to be stopped early, and staff did not document the administration process. The facility's pharmacy advised that Levothyroxine did not need to be held before and after tube feeding, contrary to manufacturer's recommendations. The resident did not receive their caloric needs, and the DON was unaware of potential interactions between Levothyroxine and the tube feeding formula.
A facility failed to secure a portable oxygen tank for a resident receiving oxygen therapy. The resident, who had cognitive impairment and was diagnosed with acute on chronic congestive heart failure and respiratory failure, was observed with an unsecured oxygen tank in their room on multiple occasions. The Clinical Care Coordinator stated that tanks should be stored in a metal holder or secured in a bag, but the facility's policy on oxygen storage was not provided.
The facility failed to ensure proper medication administration for two residents, leading to potential absorption issues. A resident received cholestyramine and lorazepam concurrently without checking PEG tube placement, while another received levothyroxine, MagneBind, and Toprol XL simultaneously, despite known interactions. The facility did not adhere to guidelines for medication timing, risking decreased efficacy.
The facility failed to securely store medications for two residents, who were found with medications within reach despite cognitive impairments and no physician orders for self-administration. The Clinical Care Coordinator confirmed the oversight, acknowledging that medications should not have been left at the bedside.
Call Light Accessibility Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that call lights were maintained within reach for several residents, leading to a deficiency in resident care. Observations revealed that call lights for six residents were consistently out of reach, either looped over equipment, on the floor, or placed on walls away from the residents' beds. This was noted during multiple observations over several days, indicating a pattern of neglect in ensuring call lights were accessible to residents who were dependent on them for assistance. Resident R117, who had a history of stroke, malnutrition, and heart attack, was observed multiple times with the call light out of reach, despite being totally dependent for all activities of daily living. Similarly, residents R6, R48, R108, R118, and R482, all with varying degrees of cognitive impairment and physical limitations, were found with call lights either on the floor, under the bed, or hanging on walls, making it impossible for them to call for help when needed. Interviews with staff, including the Director of Nursing and a Licensed Practical Nurse, confirmed that call lights should be within reach, yet this was not the case for these residents. The facility's policy on call lights clearly states that they should be placed within reach of residents and that staff are responsible for ensuring this. However, the repeated observations of call lights being out of reach for these residents highlight a failure to adhere to this policy. The deficiency was further underscored by the residents' inability to communicate their needs effectively, as some resorted to yelling for assistance due to the inaccessibility of their call lights.
Failure to Maintain Resident Dignity
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to maintain the dignity of a resident, identified as R101, who was legally blind and had diagnoses including Heart Failure and Dementia. During observations on three separate days, a handwritten sign was posted above R101's bed stating "He is a feeder." This sign was visible to anyone entering the room, and R101 was unaware of its presence. When questioned, the Director of Nursing (DON) was not aware of the sign and stated that such wording should not be used or posted. The facility did not provide a specific policy addressing resident dignity but did provide a document outlining residents' rights, which included the expectation that services be provided in a confidential and dignified manner.
Failure to Implement Care Plan Interventions for Residents
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement care plan interventions for three residents, leading to deficiencies in their care. Resident R40 experienced multiple falls, with a specific incident on 5/25/24 where they fell while trying to get a cake. Despite the fall being documented, there was no follow-up intervention or medication review by a physician as required by the care plan. The Director of Nursing confirmed that the physician did not document their review of R40's medication following the fall, which was a recommended intervention. Resident R108 was observed multiple times lying in bed without heel protector boots, which were supposed to be worn to prevent contractures. The boots were found in various locations in the room, but not on the resident's feet. Additionally, R108's call light was consistently out of reach, contrary to the care plan's requirement for it to be accessible. Interviews with CNAs revealed a lack of awareness and implementation of these care plan interventions. Similarly, Resident R482 was observed with only one heel protector on, despite the care plan stating that both heels should be protected. The resident's call light was also out of reach, and interviews with staff indicated a lack of familiarity with the resident's needs. These observations highlight the facility's failure to adhere to the care plans, which are designed to meet the residents' medical and safety needs.
Failure to Revise Care Plan for Resident's Access to Water
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to revise the care plan for a resident, identified as R101, who was admitted with diagnoses including Heart Failure and Dementia. The resident was also legally blind, and the facility's records indicated that all personal items should be within reach. However, observations on three consecutive days revealed that R101's water cup was consistently placed out of reach on the over-bed table next to the wall at the head of the bed. When asked, R101 confirmed they could not reach the water cup if they wanted a drink. The care plan for R101 did not reflect the need for the resident to have access to their water cup, nor did it address the necessity for assistance with drinking due to impaired coordination and vision impairment. The Director of Nursing acknowledged that the expectation was for the care plan to specifically address the placement of the water cup and the provision of assistance for drinks between meals. The facility's policy on care plan revisions emphasized that care plans should be updated as the resident's condition changes, which was not adhered to in this case.
Failure to Reposition Dependent Residents Timely
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure timely repositioning for two dependent residents, leading to a deficiency in care. Resident R117, who was totally dependent for care due to severe cognitive impairment and other medical conditions such as stroke and heart attack, was observed multiple times over two days in the same position without being repositioned. Despite being totally dependent and having a care plan that required assistance for bed mobility, R117 was not repositioned as needed, which could contribute to the development of pressure ulcers, as indicated by the presence of a wound on the left foot. Similarly, Resident R47, who required substantial to maximal assistance for bed mobility due to conditions like dementia and heart failure, was observed in the same position on their back over several hours on multiple occasions. The care plan for R47 also indicated a need for assistance with bed mobility to prevent pressure ulcers, yet there was no documentation of consistent repositioning or refusals of repositioning. The facility's policy on positioning did not specify a time frame for repositioning, which contributed to the deficiency in care for these residents.
Failure to Administer PEG Tube Feeding Per Physician's Orders
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to administer PEG tube feeding and medication according to the physician's orders for a resident diagnosed with cerebral infarction due to embolism of the right cerebellar artery. The resident, who is cognitively impaired, was observed multiple times without the prescribed tube feeding infusing. On one occasion, the tube feeding pump was powered off, and no feeding bottles or tubing were present in the room. The physician's orders specified that the resident should receive Jevity 1.5 at 65ml per hour for 20 hours, from 2 PM to 10 AM, with a water flush while the feeding is infusing. Interviews with facility staff revealed inconsistencies in the administration of the tube feeding. An LPN confirmed that the tube feeding was supposed to infuse from 2 PM until 10 AM but was stopped early by another LPN. The staff did not document the start, stop, or flush of the tube feeding in the resident's progress notes, as they believed it was unnecessary unless there was an abnormal event. Additionally, the facility's pharmacy had advised that the tube feeding did not need to be held before and after administering Levothyroxine, despite the manufacturer's recommendation to take the medication on an empty stomach. The Registered Dietician confirmed that the resident was not receiving their caloric needs due to the early cessation of the tube feeding. The Director of Nursing stated that tube feeding should be held for residual amounts over 100ml and if the resident needs to lay flat during care. However, the DON was unaware of the interaction between Levothyroxine and the ingredients in Jevity 1.5, which contain soy and milk, and stated they would need to consult with the pharmacy regarding this issue.
Failure to Secure Portable Oxygen Tank for Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to secure a portable oxygen tank for a resident, identified as R108, who was under oxygen therapy. Observations on multiple occasions over two days revealed an unsecured portable oxygen tank in R108's room. R108 was observed in bed wearing oxygen via nasal cannula connected to a concentrator, while the portable oxygen tank remained unsecured. R108's medical records indicated a diagnosis of acute on chronic congestive heart failure, acute on chronic respiratory failure, and unspecified dementia, with a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 6, indicating cognitive impairment. During an interview, the Clinical Care Coordinator explained that portable oxygen tanks should be stored in a metal wheeled holder or secured in a bag if on a wheelchair. The facility's policy on oxygen storage was requested but not provided by the completion of the survey.
Medication Administration Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure proper medication administration practices for two residents, R117 and R47, leading to potential medication absorption issues and diminished efficacy. For R117, a registered nurse administered cholestyramine and lorazepam concurrently via a PEG tube without checking the tube's placement and residual. The electronic order note indicated that cholestyramine could affect the efficacy of other medications, such as loperamide, when administered together. Despite this, the medication administration record (MAR) showed that cholestyramine was given four times daily, and lorazepam was administered three times daily, without consideration of the recommended timing to avoid interactions. For R47, the morning medication administration was reviewed, revealing that MagneBind, levothyroxine, and Toprol XL were given simultaneously. Levothyroxine was scheduled for 9:00 AM but was administered at 10:40 AM, with previous doses given at 6:00 AM. The MAR documented levothyroxine administration at 9:00 AM on prior days, while MagneBind and Toprol were given upon rising. The facility's clinical care coordinator noted that the 9:00 AM timing was for compliance, despite a drug protocol alert indicating a moderate interaction between levothyroxine and calcium salts, which could decrease levothyroxine's effects. The Director of Nursing reported that the facility follows pharmacy recommendations for medication administration, and the medication regime reviews had not flagged the cholestyramine administration as a concern. However, the facility's policy and external resources indicate that cholestyramine should be administered at least one hour before or 4-6 hours after other medications to avoid absorption issues. The facility's failure to adhere to these guidelines resulted in the potential for decreased medication efficacy for the residents involved.
Medication Storage Deficiency
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure the safe storage of medications for two residents, R6 and R29, as observed during a survey. R6 was found with Timolol eye drops on their bedside table within reach, despite having a cognitive impairment indicated by a BIMS score of 6 and no physician order for self-administration of medication. R6 was admitted with a diagnosis of heart failure and dementia, which further necessitates careful management of medication storage. Similarly, R29 had an albuterol inhaler, artificial tears, and nasal spray on their nightstand, accessible to them over multiple observations. R29's BIMS score of 14 also indicated cognitive impairment, and there was no physician order permitting self-administration of medications. The Clinical Care Coordinator acknowledged the oversight when shown the medications at the bedside, confirming that they should not have been left there. The facility's policy requires physician authorization for residents to self-administer medications, which was not obtained in these cases.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 494 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 2 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Clinton Township
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Church Of Christ Care Center | 1.3 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Martha T Berry Mcf | 3 mi | — | 7 | 0 |
| Harmony Village Of Clinton | 4.1 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| Fraser Villa | 4.8 mi | — | 6 | 0 |
| Medilodge Of Sterling Heights | 5.9 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Lakepointe Senior Care And Rehabilitation Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.