5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
5/5
CMS (the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services) is the federal agency that rates nursing home quality. Its Overall Rating runs from 1 to 5 stars, combining health inspections, staffing, and quality measures, with inspections weighted most heavily.
Ihm Senior Living Community is a dependable community based in Monroe, Michigan, offering an array of care options, including independent living, assisted living, memory care, and skilled nursing. Offering a continuum of care, the community empowers residents to comfortably age in place even as their needs change. Residents enjoy an ideal blend of comfort and convenience in their spacious one-bedroom residences that feature plenty of natural light, and a variety of safety and security features for residents’ peace of mind.
Residents can freely continue their past passions, discover new ones, or enjoy plenty of opportunities for relaxation with cleaning, cooking, and house maintenance taken care of by a dedicated team. With access to physical, speech, and occupational therapies, and a team of experts that cater to the diverse medical and non-medical needs of individuals with chronic illness or disability, residents are guaranteed to recover quickly and get back to their routines immediately. The community thoroughly evaluates each resident’s needs and provides them with individualized care plans, designed to accommodate their individual preferences and care needs.
The Overall CMS Rating combines results from health inspections, staffing levels and quality measures. Health inspections carry the most weight. Staffing and quality scores can increase or decrease the final rating based on performance compared to state and national standards.
Based on the results of the facility's three most recent standard inspections and any complaint investigations. CMS reviews the number, scope, and severity of deficiencies, with more recent findings weighted more heavily.
Measures average nursing staff hours per resident per day, including Registered Nurses (RNs) and total nursing staff. Ratings are adjusted based on the level of care residents require and are compared to state and national benchmarks.
Based on clinical and physical health indicators reported to CMS, such as hospital readmissions, falls, pressure ulcers, and improvements in mobility. These measures reflect how well residents' health needs are being managed.
Data period: Q4 2025 (October 1 – December 31, 2025).
This nursing home is ranked 24th out of 128 nursing homes we track in Michigan for nurse hours. Total adjusted nursing hours per resident per day, combining RN, LPN, and aide time. CMS adjusts this for case-mix so facilities can be fairly compared.
4h 43mStandout metric: LPN / LVN is +50% above Michigan average
2 of 6 metrics below Michigan average
RNs hold the highest nursing license and can assess residents, interpret test results, and direct care plans. More RN hours per day often signals stronger clinical oversight and faster response to health changes. All 11 are the facility's own employees; no agency contractors work in this role.
11 staff · 8.8-hour shifts
Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs) or Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVNs) deliver routine hands-on care — medication administration, wound dressing, and monitoring vital signs. They work under RN supervision and make up a large share of daily bedside care. 36 total: 18 of the facility's own employees and 18 agency contractors.
36 staff · 8-hour shifts
Certified Nurse Aides (CNAs) provide the most direct day-to-day assistance: bathing, dressing, feeding, and mobility. Nurse aide hours are typically the largest staffing category and directly affect residents' quality of life. 87 total: 48 of the facility's own employees and 39 agency contractors.
87 staff · 7-hour shifts
Hours per resident per day provided by licensed Physical Therapists (PTs) or PT Assistants. PT services help residents recover mobility after injury or illness and are especially important for post-acute (short-stay) rehabilitation.
Combined nursing hours (RN + LPN + Nurse Aide) per resident per day on weekends. Staffing often drops on weekends — this figure reveals whether the facility maintains adequate coverage outside of weekday hours.
RN + LPN + aide · Sat–Sun
Registered nurse hours specifically on weekends. Facilities sometimes reduce RN presence on Saturdays and Sundays — a low weekend RN figure compared to weekday hours can indicate reduced clinical oversight when most administrative staff are absent.
Sat–Sun
Every person who worked here at any point in the quarter, employees and contractors. It is not how many are on site at once: that is the "on an average day" figure.
175
93 employees · 82 contractors · 41 on an average day
175 total staff / 50 residents. Residents: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (data as of Jun 2026); staff: CMS Payroll-Based Journal (Q4 2025).Residents and staff come from two different CMS releases, so the two counts can be a few months apart.
3.50 : 1
↑ 109% · MI 1.67This facility: 3.50 staff per resident, 109% above the Michigan average of 1.67 (among Michigan facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
175 staff ÷ 50 residents
See full Michigan ranking →
Average hours one staff member works on a day they are on shift, across every role.
7.1 h
↓ 10% · MI 7.9 hThis facility: 7.1 h, 10% below the Michigan average of 7.9 h (among Michigan facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
26,901 staff hours this quarter
See full Michigan ranking →88.2% of staff hours were worked by the facility's own employees
Michigan average: 91.4% · Contractors this quarter: Certified Nursing Assistant (39), Licensed Practical Nurse (18), Respiratory Therapy Technician (9), Occupational Therapy Assistant (5), Speech Language Pathologist (3), Physical Therapy Assistant (3), Physical Therapy Aide (2), Nurse Aide in Training (1), Qualified Social Worker (1), Medical Director (1)
Why it matters: employees work here week after week and get to know each resident's routines and needs. Agency contractors often rotate between facilities, so a higher employee share usually means more consistent care.
A smaller, more intimate setting that may offer a quieter environment and closer staff-resident interactions.
58
Rank #104 / 131Bed count — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 104th out of 131 nursing homes we track in Michigan for bed count. Shows this facility's certified or reported bed count compared to other Michigan facilities. Larger communities may offer more amenities, programs, and on-site services for residents and families. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Michigan that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Smaller home · May offer a more intimate, personalized care environment.
Car-dependent. A few nearby services may be reachable on foot, but most trips require transportation.
Rank #78 / 157Walk Score — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 78th out of 157 nursing homes we track in Michigan for walk score. Shows how walkable this facility's neighborhood is compared to the average walk score across Michigan facilities. Higher scores benefit residents, families, and staff. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Michigan that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Occupancy between 85% and 95% suggests balanced demand.
Rank #40 / 91Occupancy rate — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 40th out of 91 nursing homes we track in Michigan for occupancy. Shows this facility's occupancy rate versus the Michigan average, with its Statewide rank out of 91. Higher occupancy signals strong local demand and financial stability. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Michigan that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.Based on 52.4 residents and 58 beds. Source: CMS Provider Information, average daily residents (data as of Aug 2026)
Higher than the Michigan average: 83.8%
Average number of days residents stay at this facility, based on CMS cost report data. Shorter stays often reflect post-acute or rehab care; longer stays reflect long-term care.
IHM Senior Living Community is legally operated by IHM Senior Living Community, Inc.
This profile shows two inspection records, and their totals often differ. Inspection History and the Inspection Scorecard below are state data — the figures the state publishes and the state inspection reports we hold on file — covering the entire facility. CMS Health Inspection History covers only this home's Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing beds, from federal certification surveys.
In Michigan, the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (LARA) conducts unannounced inspections and investigations to ensure long-term care facilities comply with state health codes.
This scorecard compares key inspection, deficiency, and complaint metrics at this facility against the Michigan state average. Metrics rated ≥15% worse than average are highlighted in red; those ≥15% better are highlighted in green.
Deficiencies
| This Facility | MI Average | vs. MI Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total deficiencies
Formal regulatory issues recorded by inspectors across all inspection types.
| 0 | 7.0 | This facility has 100% fewer total deficiencies than a typical Michigan nursing home (0 vs. MI avg 7).↓ 100% better |
Inspections
| This Facility | MI Average | vs. MI Avg |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Total inspections
Combined count of all inspections conducted at this facility.
| 3 | 5.0 | This facility has had 40% fewer total inspections than the Michigan average (3 vs. MI avg 5). More inspections can mean more regulatory scrutiny rather than worse care.↓ 40% fewer |
Federal inspection data published by CMS, covering this home's Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing/nursing beds only.
100% corrected
3 of 3 citations corrected Latest inspection: Mar 28, 2024 · 3 citations, all corrected
Most cited category: Infection Control, 1 of 3 citations · 3 categories in total
Corrected
Corrected
Corrected
Health citations are formal notices following inspections when they fail to comply with safety and care standards.
All 3 citations resulted from standard inspections.
Includes all CMS health inspection records for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Data sourced from CMS Health Deficiencies reports, which cover the Medicare and/or Medicaid-certified skilled-nursing and nursing beds and no other part of the community. Citation severity codes range from A (least serious) to L (most serious). Immediate Jeopardy (J-L) citations indicate situations where the facility's noncompliance has placed residents at risk of death or serious harm.
Federal penalties imposed by CMS for regulatory violations, including civil money penalties (fines) and denials of payment for new Medicare/Medicaid admissions.
Source: CMS Penalties Database
No penalties in the past 3 years
No civil money penalties or payment denials were reported in the last 3 years.
How residents at this home fare on health outcomes and preventive care, compared with the Michigan average.
CMS star rating for the care of long-stay residents, who live at the home for 100 days or more. It is built from the long-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
4
/ 5
Above average
↓ 2% · MI 4.1This facility: 4.0, 2% below the MI average of 4.1 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
CMS star rating for the care of short-stay residents, mostly people recovering after a hospital stay for under 100 days. It is built from the short-stay quality measures below. 5 stars is the best.
4
/ 5
Above average
↑ 23% · MI 3.3This facility: 4.0, 23% above the MI average of 3.3 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of five long-stay measures: pressure ulcers, falls with major injury, unplanned weight loss, worsening ability to walk, and needing more help with daily activities. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
13.6
Score · lower is better
↑ 89% · MI 7.2This facility: 13.6, 89% above the MI average of 7.2 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Average of three long-stay measures: needing more help with daily activities, worsening ability to walk, and loss of bowel or bladder control. Each is the % of residents affected, so lower is better.
29.0
Score · lower is better
↑ 103% · MI 14.3This facility: 29.0, 103% above the MI average of 14.3 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.13 long-stay measures: 10 better, 3 worse
8 short-stay measures: 4 better, 1 worse, 3 compared with US only
People who live at the home · 13 measures
Percent of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased
24.1%
↑ 124% · MI 10.8This facility: 24.1, 124% above the MI average of 10.8 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents whose ability to move independently worsened
33.9%
↑ 182% · MI 12.0This facility: 33.9, 182% above the MI average of 12.0 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of low risk long-stay residents who lose control of their bowels or bladder
29.0%
↑ 45% · MI 20.0This facility: 29.0, 45% above the MI average of 20.0 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection
1.4%
↓ 8% · MI 1.5This facility: 1.4, 8% below the MI average of 1.5 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury
2.1%
↓ 30% · MI 3.0This facility: 2.1, 30% below the MI average of 3.0 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay high risk residents with pressure ulcers
4.4%
↓ 13% · MI 5.1This facility: 4.4, 13% below the MI average of 5.1 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who lose too much weight
3.5%
↓ 35% · MI 5.4This facility: 3.5, 35% below the MI average of 5.4 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who have depressive symptoms
3.9%
↓ 10% · MI 4.3This facility: 3.9, 10% below the MI average of 4.3 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication
11.1%
↓ 25% · MI 14.8This facility: 11.1, 25% below the MI average of 14.8 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 5% · MI 95.3This facility: 100.0, 5% above the MI average of 95.3 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of long-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
↑ 5% · MI 95.0This facility: 100.0, 5% above the MI average of 95.0 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Number of hospitalizations per 1,000 long-stay resident days.
0.93
↓ 47% · MI 1.74This facility: 0.93, 47% below the MI average of 1.74 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1,000 long-stay resident days.
0.70
↓ 55% · MI 1.54This facility: 0.70, 55% below the MI average of 1.54 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Rehab and recovery after a hospital stay · 8 measures
Percentage of residents at or above expected ability to care for themselves at discharge.
65.4%
↑ 22% · US 53.7This facility: 65.4, 22% above the US average of 53.7 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Rate of successful return to home or community from a skilled nursing facility.
58.9%
↑ 17% · US 50.6This facility: 58.9, 17% above the US average of 50.6 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Percentage of SNF residents who experience falls with major injury during their stay.
0.0%
↓ 100% · US 0.8This facility: 0.0, 100% below the US average of 0.8 (among US facilities reporting a recent figure).
Percent of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication
2.1%
↑ 85% · MI 1.1This facility: 2.1, 85% above the MI average of 1.1 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the pneumococcal vaccine
100.0%
↑ 20% · MI 83.3This facility: 100.0, 20% above the MI average of 83.3 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percent of short-stay residents assessed and appropriately given the seasonal influenza vaccine
100.0%
↑ 26% · MI 79.5This facility: 100.0, 26% above the MI average of 79.5 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percentage of short-stay residents who were re-hospitalized after their nursing home admission.
16.3%
↓ 33% · MI 24.2This facility: 16.3, 33% below the MI average of 24.2 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.
Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit.
7.7%
↓ 33% · MI 11.5This facility: 7.7, 33% below the MI average of 11.5 (among MI facilities reporting a recent figure).Green: 5% or more better than the state average. Yellow: within 5%. Red: 5% or more worse.Arrows show whether a figure is above or below the average. Green is better for residents, red is worse, and yellow means within 5% of the average. Grey compares with the US average only, because CMS publishes no state figure. The line on each bar marks the average.
Quality measures are calculated by CMS from Minimum Data Set (MDS) resident assessments and Medicare claims.
14% of new residents, usually for short-term rehab.
65% of new residents, often for short stays.
22% of new residents, often for long-term daily care.
Source: CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics (Data as of Jun 2026)
Total residents
50Residents meet regularly to discuss policies, care quality, and activities
Family members meet regularly to discuss policies, care quality, and activities
State-approved Nurse Aide Training and Competency Evaluation Program on-site
Part of a Continuing Care Retirement Community offering multiple care levels
Organized group of family members that meets regularly to discuss facility policies, resident care, and activities.
Organized group of residents that meets regularly to discuss facility policies, quality of life, and activities.
Data sourced from CMS Long-Term Care Facility Characteristics quarterly report. Payer mix reflects the current resident census by primary payment source.
Historical financial and operational data for IHM Senior Living Community from 2012–2025, based on CMS SNF Cost Reports. Includes all financial data for this property, which could include management/ownership changes.
Key figures below are for fiscal year ending in 06/2025.
Based on CMS SNF Cost Report for fiscal year ending in 06/2025.
Net patient revenue — what the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts are subtracted from its gross charges (CMS cost report, Worksheet G-3). It covers resident care only; money the home earns from other sources is shown separately as "Other income."
Net patient income: net patient revenue minus the home's total operating expenses. A positive figure means it earns more from resident care than it spends to deliver it; a negative figure means the opposite. It excludes non-operating "other income."
Net patient revenue — what the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts are subtracted from its gross charges (CMS cost report, Worksheet G-3). It covers resident care only; money the home earns from other sources is shown separately as "Other income."
Net patient income: net patient revenue minus the home's total operating expenses. A positive figure means it earns more from resident care than it spends to deliver it; a negative figure means the opposite. It excludes non-operating "other income."
Money the home earns outside of resident care — such as investments, grants, rentals and other non-operating sources (CMS cost report, Worksheet G-3). It is tracked separately from net patient revenue: it is not part of that figure, and it is not included in net patient income.
Staff salaries plus wage-related costs — benefits such as payroll taxes, health insurance and retirement — from the home's own accounting records (CMS cost report, Worksheet A). Contract or agency labor is counted separately, under other operating costs.
Rank #39 / 119Payroll costs — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 39th out of 119 nursing homes we track in Michigan. Shows total staff payroll — salaries plus wage-related benefits — benchmarked to the Michigan average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Higher payroll relative to peers often signals better staffing and less reliance on contract labor. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Michigan that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Payroll as a share of revenue: staff salaries and wage-related benefits divided by net patient revenue. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay.
Rank #20 / 119Payroll % of net patient revenue — State benchmarked This nursing home is ranked 20th out of 119 nursing homes we track in Michigan. Shows payroll as a percentage of net patient revenue versus the Michigan average, among facilities reporting a recent fiscal year. Below 25% may signal understaffing or heavy agency use — read with Staffing ratings. Communities with the same value for a metric share the same rank. Rankings compare like with like: every nursing home we track in Michigan that reports data for that category. Nursing homes without available data are excluded, so the pool size varies from metric to metric.
Everything it costs to run the home apart from payroll — food, utilities, supplies, maintenance, contract labor and administration. Calculated as total operating expense minus payroll (staff salaries and wage-related benefits).
The home's total operating expense for the year — all the costs of running it, salaries included (CMS cost report, Worksheet G-3).
Most residents stay long-term, while a smaller portion are admitted for short-term rehab.
Most new residents arrive under private pay (65% of admissions), and a typical private pay stay runs around 6 - 7 months.
Coverage residents most often arrive under.
Coverage residents most often leave under.
0.5 miles from city center
Estimated distance in miles from Monroe's city center to IHM Senior Living Community's address, calculated via Google Maps.
Add your location
Info below is compiled from CMS reports & the MI Licensing & Regulatory Affairs (LARA), senior community websites & trusted data sources such as Walk Score & BBB.
Communities are listed from highest-ranked to lowest-ranked based on our methodology.
The facility name. Click to view the full profile page on Assisted Living Magazine, including photos, services, and contact info.
|
CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the federal agency that regulates nursing homes) Overall 5-star rating — a composite of Health Inspection, Staffing, and Quality Measures scores. 5 stars = top 10% nationally. 1 star = bottom 10%. The single most important number to start with when comparing facilities.
|
Care Types in This Table
AL (Assisted Living):
Housing with help for daily activities like bathing, dressing, and medication, without 24-hour skilled nursing.
NH (Nursing Home):
24/7 skilled nursing care for residents with complex, ongoing medical needs.
SNF (Skilled Nursing Facility):
Round-the-clock nursing care, often for recovery after surgery, injury, or illness.
MC (Memory Care):
Secured, specialized care for people living with Alzheimer's or dementia.
RC (Respite Care):
Short-term temporary care that gives family caregivers a break.
IL (Independent Living):
Community living with dining, activities, and transportation for active seniors who need little personal care.
HOS (Hospice Care):
Comfort-focused care for those with a terminal illness, prioritizing quality of life over treatment.
PC (Palliative Care):
Comfort-focused care for serious illness at any stage, including alongside curative treatment.
|
Neighborhood or city area where the facility is located. Proximity to family, hospitals, and green space matters for both quality of life and ease of visitation. Consider drive time and transit access when evaluating location.
|
Licensed bed capacity. Larger facilities (300+ beds) often have more specialized programs but can feel institutional. Smaller homes (under 150 beds) tend to deliver more personalized care. Compare with Avg Res/Day to understand how full the facility typically runs.
|
Percentage of licensed beds filled on an average day. Color indicates financial health: green (90%+) = operationally strong, typically profitable. Amber (80–89%) = stable but leaving revenue on the table. Orange (70–79%) = financial strain likely, may struggle with fixed costs. Red (<70%) = significant distress, closure or ownership change risk increases sharply.
|
This facility's occupancy rate compared to the statewide average for similar facilities. A positive number means above-average demand. Facilities running 5%+ above the state average are typically the most sought-after in their market — a strong proxy for reputation.
|
CMS-adjusted total nurse hours per resident per day (RN + LPN + CNA combined). The national average is approximately 3.5 hrs. Higher is better — more direct care time per resident. Below 3.0 is a red flag. CMS weights RN hours more heavily because RNs handle complex clinical decisions that CNAs cannot.
|
CMS Health Inspection star rating (1–5 stars), based on the 3 most recent annual state surveys plus any complaint investigations. This is the hardest rating to manipulate — it reflects real surveyor findings on-site. 5 stars = fewest deficiencies found. 1 star = most. It carries the heaviest weight in the Overall CMS rating.
|
CMS Staffing star rating (1–5 stars), based on daily nurse staffing hours submitted to CMS via verified payroll data. Compares RN, LPN, and CNA coverage relative to resident acuity level. 5 stars = well above expected staffing. Weekend staffing is evaluated separately, as that's where many facilities quietly reduce coverage.
|
CMS Quality Measures star rating (1–5 stars), based on 15 clinical outcome metrics including fall rates, pressure ulcers, antipsychotic drug use, and hospital readmissions. Captures actual resident health outcomes, not just compliance. High QM combined with low Health Inspection scores can indicate a facility with strong care but weak documentation practices.
|
Registered Nurse hours per resident/day compared to the statewide average. RNs are the highest-skilled nursing staff — they assess residents, manage medications, and respond to emergencies. A value of +50% means RN coverage is 50% above the state norm. Negative values are a concern for residents with complex or acute medical needs.
|
Total nursing staff hours (RN + LPN + CNA combined) per resident/day vs. the statewide average. A broader measure than RN vs State — it captures the entire care team. A facility can have high total staffing but low RN hours, meaning more aides and fewer nurses. Read both columns together for the full picture.
|
Total dollar amount of federal monetary fines (civil money penalties) issued by CMS in the past 3 years. Fines are only levied for serious violations — typically actual harm to residents, repeated uncorrected deficiencies, or systemic non-compliance. Even a single fine is noteworthy. Multiple fines strongly suggest a pattern, not isolated incidents.
|
Total health deficiency citations from the most recent standard inspection cycle. Minor citations (scope A–C) are common and often administrative in nature. Higher counts aren't always disqualifying, but should be read alongside Severe Citations to understand actual harm levels. Under 10 is strong for a large facility; 30+ warrants a closer look.
|
Average deficiency citations per CMS inspection (survey) in the reporting window — total citations divided by the number of inspections. Lower is better; compare alongside total Citations and Severe Citations for context.
|
Citations at CMS scope/severity level G or higher — G–I means actual harm occurred; J–L means residents were placed in immediate jeopardy. (D–F is potential for harm only). Examples include unaddressed falls, medication errors causing injury, neglect, or abuse.
|
Average number of residents in the building on any given day, derived from annual census data. Reflects true operating scale — a 400-bed facility running 200 residents/day operates very differently from one at 390. Higher resident counts generally mean more funded staffing hours.
|
Better Business Bureau rating (A+ to F). Reflects complaint history, business transparency, and how family disputes were resolved. A+ means no significant unresolved complaints. A blank (—) means the facility isn't BBB-accredited, which is common for healthcare providers and not necessarily a negative signal.
|
Walk Score® (0–100). Measures walkability of the surrounding area. 90–100 = Walker's Paradise. 70–89 = Very Walkable. 50–69 = Somewhat Walkable. Below 50 = Car-Dependent. Higher scores benefit family visitors, resident outings, and staff commuting.
|
The licensed owner or operator of record filed with CMS — the individual or organization legally accountable for the facility. Searching the operator name across other facilities can reveal chain or multi-site ownership, which matters: chain-operated homes tend to have more variable quality outcomes than independently run facilities.
|
What the home actually collects for resident care, after contractual allowances, bad debt and discounts — not gross billings. Taken from the latest complete annual cost report, so it is comparable across homes reporting the same period. Revenue alone doesn't indicate care quality, but it funds staffing and capital reinvestment. Pair with Payroll %. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Staff salaries plus wage-related benefits from the latest complete annual cost report. Contract and agency labour is counted separately, under other operating costs, so a home leaning on agency staff can show a low figure here. Payroll is the cost most directly tied to care quality — compare with Payroll % for full context. Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
Payroll as a share of NET PATIENT REVENUE (not gross revenue). Both figures come from the same cost-report year. A higher figure means more of each revenue dollar goes to staff pay. Read with the Staffing star rating to judge whether spend translates into coverage — and note that homes whose patient revenue covers only part of their operation can read implausibly high. The Michigan average is: 58.7% Figures are from each facility's most recent complete fiscal year — hover a value for the exact year; a * marks homes that report an older period than most facilities.
|
CMS Certification Number: the unique federal identifier for this skilled nursing provider.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IHM Senior Living Community | NH AL IL MC | Monroe (Ihm Campus) | 58
Facility
58
MI AVG
102
Rank
#104 / 131 |
90.3%
Facility
90.3%
MI AVG
83.8%
Rank
#40 / 91 | +8% | 4.72
Facility
4.72
MI AVG
4.33
Rank
#24 / 128 | -38% | +9% | $0
Facility
$0
MI AVG
$78.1k
Rank
#1 / 128 | 3
Facility
3
MI AVG
32.4
Rank
#1 / 127 | 3.0
Facility
3.0
MI AVG
4.8
Rank
#22 / 127 | - | 52 | - |
40
Facility
40
MI AVG
41
Rank
#78 / 157 | Ihm Senior Living Community, Inc | $14.5MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$14.5MFiscal year ending 06/2025
MI AVG
$13.3M
Rank
#54 / 119 | $8.6MFiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
$8.6MFiscal year ending 06/2025
MI AVG
$7.7M
Rank
#39 / 119 | 59.5%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
Facility
59.5%Fiscal year ending 06/2025
MI AVG
58.7%
Rank
#20 / 119 | 235648 | ||||
| Medilodge of Monroe | NH PC RC SNF | Monroe | 103
Facility
103
MI AVG
102
Rank
#61 / 131 |
91.5%
Facility
91.5%
MI AVG
83.8%
Rank
#35 / 91 | +9% | 3.86
Facility
3.86
MI AVG
4.33
Rank
#75 / 128 | -34% | -11% | $0
Facility
$0
MI AVG
$78.1k
Rank
#1 / 128 | 6
Facility
6
MI AVG
32.4
Rank
#3 / 127 | 2.0
Facility
2.0
MI AVG
4.8
Rank
#5 / 127 | 1 | 94 | A+ |
72
Facility
72
MI AVG
41
Rank
#18 / 157 | - | $11.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$11.6MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$13.3M
Rank
#65 / 119 | $5.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$5.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$7.7M
Rank
#80 / 119 | 50.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
50.8%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
58.7%
Rank
#82 / 119 | 235563 | ||||
| Fountain View of Monroe | NH HOS PC RC SNF | Monroe (Frenchtown Charter Township) | 119
Facility
119
MI AVG
102
Rank
#47 / 131 |
93.4%
Facility
93.4%
MI AVG
83.8%
Rank
#24 / 91 | +11% | 3.73
Facility
3.73
MI AVG
4.33
Rank
#96 / 128 | +28% | -14% | $0
Facility
$0
MI AVG
$78.1k
Rank
#1 / 128 | 7
Facility
7
MI AVG
32.4
Rank
#5 / 127 | 2.3
Facility
2.3
MI AVG
4.8
Rank
#6 / 127 | - | 111 | - |
32
Facility
32
MI AVG
41
Rank
#99 / 157 | Melissa Drake | $15.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$15.9MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$13.3M
Rank
#32 / 119 | $8.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$8.3MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$7.7M
Rank
#45 / 119 | 52.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
52.2%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
58.7%
Rank
#109 / 119 | 235225 | ||||
| Seacrest Rehabilitation and Nursing Center | NH HOS MC RC SNF | Monroe (Frenchtown Charter Township) | 131
Facility
131
MI AVG
102
Rank
#33 / 131 |
75.9%
Facility
75.9%
MI AVG
83.8%
Rank
#68 / 91 | -9% | 3.81
Facility
3.81
MI AVG
4.33
Rank
#90 / 128 | -49% | -12% | $0
Facility
$0
MI AVG
$78.1k
Rank
#1 / 128 | 15
Facility
15
MI AVG
32.4
Rank
#25 / 127 | 3.8
Facility
3.8
MI AVG
4.8
Rank
#41 / 127 | - | 99 | - |
53
Facility
53
MI AVG
41
Rank
#51 / 157 | Renewal Healthcare LLC | $9.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$9.2MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$13.3M
Rank
#108 / 119 | $5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$7.7M
Rank
#103 / 119 | 58%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
58%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
58.7%
Rank
#23 / 119 | 235232 | ||||
| Lutheran Homes of Michigan | NH AL | Monroe (South Monroe) | 122
Facility
122
MI AVG
102
Rank
#42 / 131 |
68.0%
Facility
68.0%
MI AVG
83.8%
Rank
#80 / 91 | -19% | 2.24
Facility
2.24
MI AVG
4.33
Rank
#128 / 128 | -18% | -48% | $0
Facility
$0
MI AVG
$78.1k
Rank
#1 / 128 | 6
Facility
6
MI AVG
32.4
Rank
#3 / 127 | 1.5
Facility
1.5
MI AVG
4.8
Rank
#2 / 127 | - | 83 | - |
57
Facility
57
MI AVG
41
Rank
#44 / 157 | - | $10.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$10.5MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$13.3M
Rank
#76 / 119 | $5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
$5.4MFiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
$7.7M
Rank
#88 / 119 | 51.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
Facility
51.5%Fiscal year ending 12/2024
MI AVG
58.7%
Rank
#88 / 119 | 235274 |
Rank badges are statewide and care-type specific: each nursing home is ranked against every other MI nursing home we track that reports that metric, not just the 5 on this page. See how we rank facilities
IHM Senior Living Community is located in Monroe, Michigan.
Here are the financial assistance programs available to residents in Michigan.
IHM Senior Living Community is in the IHM Campus neighborhood of Monroe.
IHM Senior Living Community has a walk score of 40. Car-dependent. A few nearby services may be reachable on foot, but most trips require transportation.
According to MI state health department records, IHM Senior Living Community's license number is AH580402316.
According to MI state health department records, IHM Senior Living Community's license expires on July 31, 2027.
IHM Senior Living Community's occupancy is 90.3%.
No, IHM Senior Living Community has a no-pet policy.
IHM Senior Living Community is registered as a non-profit in MI.
Care Cost Calculator: See Prices in Your Area
Nursing Home Data Explorer
Don’t Wait Too Long: 7 Red Flag Signs Your Parent Needs Assisted Living Now
The True Cost of Assisted Living in 2025 – And How Families Are Paying For It
Understanding Senior Living Costs: Pricing Models, Discounts & Financial Assistance
