Sanilac Medical Care: Staff Verbal Abuse Complaint - MI
The incident involved Resident 40, a woman the nursing assistant, identified in inspection records as CNA H, described as not cognitively intact. The complaint triggered interviews with staff, the facility's Director of Nursing, and CNA H herself. What emerged was a partial admission wrapped in justifications, a second nursing assistant caught in the middle, and a resident who overheard enough that she needed to be reassured afterward.
CNA H did not deny everything. She admitted to venting loudly. She admitted to saying "this is some dumb shit." What she denied was that any of it happened in Resident 40's room, or that she directed the words at the resident directly. Her position, stated plainly during a phone interview with inspectors on August 20, was that she had her back to the residents in the dining room, was approximately ten feet away, and never used Resident 40's name.
That framing did not resolve the central allegation. CNA I, a second nursing assistant who witnessed part of what happened, told inspectors that CNA H had called Resident 40 a "dumb ass." CNA I also confirmed that Resident 40 overheard the abuse and that CNA I had to provide reassurance to the resident afterward, telling her that everyone needs to get along. CNA I then called the Director of Nursing to report what had happened.
The sequence of events, as reconstructed from the inspection record, began when CNA H was preparing to assist Resident 40 with a Hoyer lift, a mechanical device used to transfer residents who cannot move themselves. Resident 40 said CNA H couldn't help her. According to CNA H, the resident had also told CNA I that she didn't want CNA H caring for her because CNA H had been mean to her grandmother. CNA H's response to that, in her own words to inspectors: "She's not right. A week ago, she tried to stab me with a pen. She isn't cognitive."
That characterization, offered as context, is itself notable. CNA H was describing a resident in her care, a resident she was assigned to transfer with a mechanical lift, as someone whose complaints about her could be dismissed because the resident lacked cognition. The resident was on the toilet when CNA H left.
CNA H walked to the dining room. Other residents were present. She vented loudly. She said "this is some dumb shit." She told inspectors she knew venting in the dining room was wrong. She also told inspectors that the nurse who reported her had it out for her, and that she did not do what she was being accused of.
Those two statements sit uneasily next to each other. If she did not do what she was accused of, the admission that she knew venting in the dining room was wrong becomes harder to explain. The inspection record does not resolve that tension. It records what CNA H said and leaves the contradiction on the page.
The violation was cited under F0600, which covers abuse, neglect, and exploitation of residents. Inspectors assessed the level of harm as minimal harm or potential for actual harm, and noted that few residents were affected. Those classifications sit at the lower end of the federal harm scale. They do not mean nothing happened.
What the inspection record captures is a resident who was called a "dumb ass" by someone assigned to care for her, or who overheard language directed at her situation while sitting on a toilet in a facility where she lives. It captures a second nursing assistant who witnessed enough to call the Director of Nursing. It captures a resident who needed to be told that everyone needs to get along.
The inspection record does not say what happened to CNA H after the investigation. It does not say whether she was suspended, retrained, or returned to the floor. It does not say whether Resident 40 was ever assigned a different aide, or whether she was ever in a position again where CNA H was the person sent to help her with a Hoyer lift.
CNA H's account of the pen incident, offered to explain why Resident 40's account of events shouldn't be trusted, appears nowhere else in the inspection record. There is no corroboration for it, no incident report referenced, no other staff member who mentioned it. It was something CNA H said to an inspector on the phone to explain why a resident who complained about her was not a reliable witness to her own care.
Resident 40 did not speak to inspectors, at least not in any portion of the record made available. Her account of what happened exists only in what CNA I reported: that she overheard the abuse, that she was upset enough to need reassurance, and that she had told CNA I she didn't want CNA H caring for her because CNA H had been mean to her grandmother. That last detail, whatever its origin, was the thing CNA H said set the whole incident off.
The dining room detail is worth sitting with. CNA H was not alone in a hallway. She was not in a break room. She was in a space where residents were present, eating or waiting for meals, and she vented loudly enough that the inspection record treats the presence of those residents as a relevant fact. CNA H's defense was geometry: her back was turned, she was ten feet away, she didn't use anyone's name. The inspection record does not treat that geometry as exculpatory.
Verbal abuse in nursing homes is documented more often than it is reported. Residents who depend on staff for transfers, toileting, and meals are not always in a position to report what happens to them, and when they do, they are sometimes described, as Resident 40 was described by CNA H, as not cognitive, not right, not reliable. CNA I's decision to call the Director of Nursing is what put this incident into the inspection record at all. Without that call, Resident 40 would have been left with whatever she heard, and no one outside the building would have known.
The inspection was a complaint survey, meaning someone filed a complaint that triggered the visit. The record does not say who filed it. It may have been CNA I. It may have been someone else. The record begins where it begins, with inspectors already asking questions, and works backward through phone interviews to what CNA H said and what CNA I saw.
What the record ends with is CNA H's own words: she knew venting in the dining room was wrong, and she did not do what she was being accused of. Resident 40 was on the toilet when CNA H left the room.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Sanilac Medical Care Facility from 2025-08-21 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Corrections: We strive for accuracy in everything we publish. If you believe any fact in this article is incorrect, please contact us with details, and we will review and correct it promptly.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: November 3, 2026 · Our methodology
Sanilac Medical Care Facility in Sandusky, MI was cited for abuse-related violations during a health inspection on August 21, 2025.
The incident involved Resident 40, a woman the nursing assistant, identified in inspection records as CNA H, described as not cognitively intact.
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.