Kith Haven: Resident Banned After Police Find Them With Crack Pipe - MI
Kith Haven prohibited Resident #701 from coming back after the incident, despite the person having a legal guardian who wanted them returned to the facility. Federal inspectors found the nursing home violated discharge planning requirements during the August complaint investigation.
The chain of events began when Resident #701 was hospitalized and cleared for discharge on July 22. Emergency department notes from 10:49 AM that day showed psychiatry consultants recommended no inpatient psychiatric admission and determined the patient was "medically clear" and "safe for discharge home."
But the resident never made it back.
Hospital records from the next evening revealed what happened next. At 9:17 PM on July 23, emergency department staff documented that Resident #701 had been "discharged yesterday" and was "supposed to be brought to them yesterday by transport company after discharge." Instead, the "patient ran out of van and has been missing."
Police had issued a "Be on Lookout" alert for the missing resident at the facility's request. Officers found Resident #701 "on the side of the road with a crack pipe" and brought them back to the hospital emergency department.
That's when Kith Haven's position became clear.
Hospital social workers contacted the facility about taking the resident back. Kith Haven "states that patient is prohibited from returning to the facility at this time due to their behavior," according to the emergency department notes reviewed by federal inspectors.
The decision left Resident #701 stranded. Social worker F told inspectors the resident "had to be held in the hospital for several days before an appropriate alternate placement was able to be found."
The social worker emphasized that Resident #701 "lived there and had a legal guardian who wanted them returned there." But the facility's refusal meant finding another placement entirely.
Federal inspectors found Kith Haven's actions violated its own policies on discharge planning. The facility's policy, last revised in September 2023, requires developing "an effective discharge planning process that focuses on the resident's discharge goals" and preparing "the resident to be an active partner in their care."
Crucially, the policy states "the discharge plan will be discussed with the resident and/or the resident representative."
Inspectors found no evidence such discussions occurred before Kith Haven banned the resident's return.
The facility also violated notification requirements. Kith Haven's policy on notification of changes, revised as recently as February 2024, mandates that "the facility must inform the resident and notify, consistent with his or her authority, the resident representative(s) when there is a change in status."
The prohibition against returning represented a fundamental change in the resident's status and living situation.
Yet the inspection found no documentation that either Resident #701 or their legal guardian received proper notification about the facility's decision to bar readmission.
The case illustrates the vulnerable position of nursing home residents who require behavioral health support. Resident #701 had been deemed medically stable and appropriate for discharge to their previous living arrangement. Psychiatric consultants saw no need for inpatient mental health treatment.
Instead, a moment of crisis during transport resulted in permanent displacement from their established care setting.
The legal guardian's desire for the resident to return suggests family believed Kith Haven remained the appropriate placement. But the facility's unilateral decision to refuse readmission overrode those wishes.
Federal regulations require nursing homes to involve residents and their representatives in discharge planning decisions. The requirements exist specifically to prevent facilities from abandoning residents during difficult periods.
Kith Haven's actions forced hospital staff to scramble for alternative placement while Resident #701 remained in an emergency department for days. The resident went from having an established care arrangement to becoming essentially homeless, dependent on hospital social workers to locate any facility willing to accept them.
The inspection narrative doesn't reveal whether Resident #701 ultimately found appropriate long-term placement or what happened to their belongings and care arrangements at Kith Haven.
What's clear is that a resident with a legal guardian who wanted them back at their established care facility was instead prohibited from returning after a single incident during transport.
The federal citation for minimal harm suggests inspectors found Kith Haven's violation serious enough to document but didn't identify immediate jeopardy to other residents. Still, the case demonstrates how quickly vulnerable residents can lose their housing and care arrangements when facilities make unilateral decisions about readmission.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Kith Haven from 2025-08-14 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Additional Resources
Data source: Official federal inspection data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
Editorial process: AI-synthesized regulatory data, reviewed for accuracy by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: June 20, 2026 · Our methodology
Kith Haven in Flint, MI was cited for violations during a health inspection on August 14, 2025.
Kith Haven prohibited Resident #701 from coming back after the incident, despite the person having a legal guardian who wanted them returned to the facility.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.