No sales calls · nothing personal collected unless you ask us to · no facility pays to be here
Text size
Contrast

Good Samaritan - West Union

201 Hall Street, West Union, IA 52175 · Non profit - Corporation · 52 certified beds · (563) 422-3814 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (563) 422-3814 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited May 2026Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)
Insights

This home’s record is mixed — some reassuring signs, some worth asking about.

In its favor
  • a middle-of-the-pack inspection score (3/5)
  • no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
Worth asking about
  • it has a citation for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • nursing-staff turnover (60%) runs well above the national median (45%)
  • about 17% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies

One thing this read cannot see: what residents and families actually experience day to day. Public data misses the feel of a place — visit unannounced, ideally at a mealtime or on a weekend, talk to staff and families, and ask your tour questions.

A plain-English summary of the public record below — not a rating, ranking, or recommendation. We take no money from any facility.

3/5
CMS overall
3 of 5
Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified 3 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 3 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
112 Jefferson St · (563) 422-3811 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
315 Highway 150 N · (563) 422-3721 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
108 S Walnut St · (563) 422-5022 · Call to confirm hours
Park
W Union St · Typically dawn to dusk

Nearest of each type, straight-line distance. Hospitals come from the CMS Hospital General Information registry; everything else from Overture Maps (public data). Hospital and park hours are typical — call ahead to confirm.

Quality measures — how residents actually fare

Overall quality measures 4 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 4 of 5

Quality-measure stars summarize outcomes CMS tracks from the assessments each home submits — avoidable hospitalizations and ER visits, falls with injury, pressure ulcers, unplanned weight loss, and long-term antipsychotic use. Because the underlying data is self-reported, weigh a high score against the independent inspection record. Long-stay = permanent residents; short-stay = rehab and post-hospital stays.

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating improved from 3 to 4 stars. From monthly CMS archive snapshots.

Horizontal axis runs 2025-02 to 2026-06. That is where CMS’s monthly archive ends, so the right-hand edge of each line is that month — not today.

Overall rating4★
Inspection scorelower = better
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
MeasureThis homeState avgTypical statevs typical state
Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased20.2%17.1%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight13.0%4.6%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.5%1.5%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection2.1%2.4%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms11.5%4.2%6.5%worse
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury5.7%3.8%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened17.5%16.6%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.7%20.8%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.7%95.3%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers4.0%4.2%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.6%25.6%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table15.3%19.5%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%2.1%1.4%better

On this measure the state average is at least twice (or half) the typical state — a gap that size is usually how the state codes and reports the measure, not how its homes actually perform. Against a benchmark this state does not sit on, a “vs typical state” verdict would mostly be measuring the state, so we compare this home with its own state instead and show both averages.

§ Antipsychotics carry an FDA boxed warning — they raise the risk of death in older people with dementia-related psychosis, and are not approved for that use. So this measure is partly a read on whether a home sedates residents instead of staffing for them. But read a low rate carefully in both directions: CMS excludes residents coded with schizophrenia (and Tourette's or Huntington's) from this measure, and federal auditors have found implausible increases in schizophrenia coding since the measure was published — so a very low rate can reflect recoding rather than less prescribing. Ask the home what share of its residents carry a schizophrenia diagnosis, and how it handles behavioral symptoms without medication.

CMS quality measures, as Care Compare shows them. For most rows lower is better (fewer falls, ulcers, hospitalizations); vaccination rates are the exception. Not every row is risk-adjusted. CMS adjusts some measures for resident mix, but falls with major injury, antipsychotic use, physical restraints and the vaccination rates are unadjusted rates — so a home caring for heavier or more behaviorally complex residents can look worse on them without providing worse care. The “typical state” column is the median of the 50 state averages — not a national average of all homes. We use it because a plain average across homes is pulled badly off course by a few states’ reporting habits (long-stay depressive symptoms is the clearest case: Illinois codes it several times higher than most states, which alone lifted the all-homes figure to about twice what a typical state records). The median of state averages resists that — but it does weigh every state equally, so a large state counts no more than a small one, and it is a benchmark of our construction rather than a CMS-published figure. better/worse means the home differs from that benchmark by more than 10% of it; closer than that reads typical. CMS does not publish how many residents each measure covers, and the counts are often small — a single resident can move a rate by several points — so treat small gaps as noise. These come from data the facility reports, so weigh them against the independent inspection record above.

Short-stay rehab — if you are coming here from a hospital

Arriving from a hospital right now? Read the discharge guide → — your appeal rights, how to slow a rushed discharge, and what to ask about the numbers below.

0.13U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.02hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.01hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.13 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 9% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 2% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNFnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identifiednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care settingnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medication list to the familyPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final dischargenot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF staynot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsenednot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalizationnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFsnot reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.

Staffing

0.72
RN hours/ resident / day
0.41
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.13
Aide hours/ resident / day
3.26
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.36
RN hoursweekends
60.0%
Total nursing turnover
63.6%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 52 beds and averages 35.7 residents a day — about 69% occupied, or roughly 16 beds typically open. It often has substantial empty capacity — worth asking why, since low census can reflect either a new or shrinking home or one families are avoiding. This is a CMS average, not live availability — no public source publishes real-time vacancies, and a home can be full the day you call. Confirm with the home, and if you need a Medicaid bed specifically, ask about that separately: a home with open beds may still not have an open Medicaid bed.

Against a benchmark — not a legal minimum. In May 2024 CMS finalized the first federal staffing floor for nursing homes: 3.48 total nurse hours per resident per day, including 0.55 RN hours and 2.45 nurse-aide hours. Its hour requirements never took effect and are no longer on the books. Homes had until 2026 (2027 if rural) to comply, and that deadline never arrived: a federal court vacated the hour requirements in April 2025 (CMS has appealed), Congress then barred enforcement until 2034, and CMS formally repealed them by rule effective February 2026. This home is not required to meet these numbers, and is not violating anything by missing them. We still show the comparison because the figures are CMS’s own published estimate of adequate staffing, which makes them a useful yardstick — but they are our benchmark, not federal law: this home’s total nurse staffing of 3.26 hrs/resident/day is below the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.72 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.13 is below the 2.45-hour aide benchmark. What federal law does require today is unchanged: “sufficient” nursing staff for residents’ needs and an RN on duty at least 8 consecutive hours a day, 7 days a week (42 CFR 483.35). Those are judged by inspectors on site, not by these averages, so read this comparison alongside the inspection record rather than as a pass/fail.

Weekend coverage: total nurse staffing is 2.78 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 3.46 on weekdays — 20% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 0.87 to 0.36 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 60% is well above the national median of 45%. 1 administrator has left in the past year.

Payroll-based (PBJ) staffing hours, as reported for Jan–Mar 2026 (CMS PBJ CY2026Q1) — the most recent quarter CMS has published, so they can lag a change of operator or staffing agency. Higher is generally better. Registered-nurse coverage and weekend staffing are the numbers families most often overlook — an RN on site matters most when something goes wrong, and coverage usually thins on weekends. High turnover means residents rarely see the same caregiver twice. One caveat: these are hours as reported, not adjusted for how sick or heavy-care this home’s residents are. CMS separately publishes a case-mix-adjusted view; we show the reported hours. A home caring for higher-acuity residents needs more hours to deliver the same care, so compare these figures against homes doing similar work, and read them next to the inspection record rather than alone.

Inspection trend

4
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-03-12)
1
at the previous standard inspection (2025-03-13)

Deficiencies are more than at the previous inspection — worsening. Fewer citations over time suggests a home is fixing problems; a rising count is a warning sign — though two surveys are a short record, and survey teams differ. These counts are from the standard annual health survey only; the full citation list below may also include findings from complaint investigations, so the two won’t always add up.

Inspection deficiencies

State health-inspection citations, most serious first. Each carries an F-code (the federal rule it cites, e.g. F-684 = quality of care) and a letter A–L marking how serious and how widespread the problem was — we translate that grid into the plain tiers shown here. Wording is the official federal description.

ABCDEFGHIJKL

Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.

13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.

  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-20 · tag F0609 — failed to report abuse allegations — isolated
    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on electronic health record (EHR), clinical records, facility records, facility policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to timely report an allegation of abuse for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 35 residents. Findings Include:Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 out of 15, which indicated moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented Resident #2 had no hallucinations or delusions. The MDS identified Resident #2 had been occasionally incontinent of urine. The MDS listed diagnoses of renal insufficiency, over-active bladder, non-Alzheimer's dementia, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).The Care Plan Report revised on 4/20/26 identified Resident #2 had a psychosocial well-being deficit related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Care Plan Intervention dated 4/20/26 directed staff to explain all care procedures prior to completing, and the Care…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-05-20 · tag F0644 — isolated
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on electronic health record (EHR) review, clinical records, facility records, facility policy review, and staff interviews the facility failed to submit an updated Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) before the PASRR short term approval end date for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #2). The facility reported a census of 35 residents.Findings Include:Resident #2's Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] documented an admission date of 2/25/26. The MDS identified Resident #2 was currently considered by the state level II PASRR process to have a serious mental illness. The MDS included a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 8 out of 15, indicating moderate cognitive impairment. The MDS documented Resident #2 had no hallucinations or delusions. The MDS listed diagnoses of depression, bipolar disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder.The Notice of PASRR Level II Outcome dated 2/16/26 documented a short-term approval end date of 4/17/26. The PASRR Outcome Explanation…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0552 — isolated
    Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review and staff interview the facility failed to provide education and obtain informed consent prior to starting psychotropic medication that have black box warnings (the most serious safety warning used by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and requires the healthcare provider to have a comprehensive discussion with the resident about the risks, benefits and alternatives for use) for 1 of 5 resident sampled (Resident #7). The facility identified a census of 38 residents.Findings include: Resident #7's 2/19/26 Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment documented the resident utilized a hearing aid and was able to hear with minimal difficulty. Resident #7 had unclear speech but was usually able to understand others. The MDS showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 13 out of 15 indicating intact cognition. The MDS documented Resident #7 had little interest/pleasure in doing things 2-6 days; felt down, depressed or hopeless 7-11 days; had little energy 2-6 days; felt bad, or a failure of letting herself or family down…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0582 — isolated
    Give residents notice of Medicaid/Medicare coverage and potential liability for services not covered.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, document review, policy review and staff interview, the facility failed to serve the Skilled Nursing Facility Advanced Beneficiary Notice of Non-Coverage (SNF ABN) as required; failed to outline the specific Medicare services that would be ending and failed to document the estimated charges to continue skilled services for 2 of 3 residents sampled (Resident #1 and #13). The SNF ABN Form communicates to a resident and/or legal representative when Medicare services will no longer be covered and they may be liable for payment of services. The facility identified a census of 38 residents.Findings include: 1.Resident #1's Electronic Healthcare Record (EHR) Census showed he admitted into Medicare skilled services on 1/22/26. A 1/22/26 10:10 PM Health Status Progress Note documented Resident #1 admitted to the facility and would be receiving physical therapy (PT) and occupational (OT) therapy services. A Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) SNF Beneficiary Protection Notification…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-03-12 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, policy review, Long Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument 3.0 User's Manual. Version 1.20.1, dated October 2025 (RAI) review and staff interview the facility failed to correctly code insulin on the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 1 of 3 residents (Resident #12) reviewed for insulin use. The facility reported a census of 38 residents.Findings include:The admission Record for resident #12 documented an admission date of 10/10/22.The MDS dated [DATE] documented the resident received insulin 1 time during the assessment period of 12/19/25- 12/25/25.The Order Summary Report dated 12/25/25 lacked an order for insulin.The Medication Administration Record (MAR) and Treatment Administration Record (TAR) lacked documentation of insulin being given.Facility policy titled MDS 3.0 (Minimum Data Set) RAI (Resident Assessment Instrument)- Rehab/Skilled & Therapy and Rehab last reviewed on 10/27/25 directs staff to determine if there is accurate documentation to support coding for the…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-03-12 · tag F0688 — failed to keep residents mobile / prevent decline — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for a resident to maintain and/or improve range of motion (ROM), limited ROM and/or mobility, unless a decline is for a medical reason.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, clinical record review, policy review, and staff interview the facility failed to implement a revised Restorative Nursing Program (RNP) and failed to provide active assist range of motion (AAROM) per the RNP for 1 of 1 residents sampled (Resident #2). The facility identified a census of 38 residents. Findings include:Resident #2's 1/1/26 Minimum Data Set (MDS) Assessment showed a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 15/15 indicating intact cognition. The Resident exhibited impaired functional mobility on one side of the upper and lower body; utilized a walker and wheelchair. The MDS listed diagnoses of stroke, hip fracture, and multiple sclerosis (a disabling autoimmune disease of the central nervous system (brain, spinal cord, and optic nerves) that causes disruption of communication between the brain and body, leading to symptoms like fatigue, mobility challenges, vision problems, and numbness). The MDS documented Resident #2 participated in 1 day of restorative nursing active range of motion in the last 7 days.A 2/25/26 Therapy and Nursing…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-10-29 · tag F0725 — failed to have enough nursing staff — widespread
    Provide enough nursing staff every day to meet the needs of every resident; and have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and observations the facility failed to provide a sufficient number of staff to ensure each resident's call light is answered timely for 5 of 6 residents reviewed (Resident #2, #3, #4, #5, #6). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: 1. According to the Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], Resident #2 had diagnoses which included diabetes and dementia. The resident had a brief interview for mental status score (BIMS) of 9 which indicated moderate cognitive ability. The MDS revealed the resident required substantial assistance from staff for toileting and activities of daily living. The resident utilized a walker with one staff to ambulate to the rest room. During an interview with Resident #2 on 10/29/24 at 11:10 am, the resident indicated when he presses his call light it takes a while for the staff to assist him to the restroom. He admitted that he sometimes has to go to the bathroom and does not wait for the staff to assist…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Nursing and Physician Services Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-10-29 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on clinical record review, staff and resident interviews, and observations the facility failed to provide tuberculosis screening for 2 of 3 new employees reviewed (Staff H and Staff I). The facility reported a census of 45 residents. Findings include: Review of employee file documents revealed Staff H-Certified Nurses Aide had a hire date of 6/25/24 and worked full time. During an interview with Staff H-CNA on 10/29/24 at 11:10 am, Staff H stated when she began her employment at the facility the former Director of Nurses only did 1 tuberculosis screening test and failed to give her the second step as required. Staff H began her Step 2 Tuberculosis screening on this day. Review of employee file documents revealed former Staff I-Certified Nurses Aide had a hire date of 12/19/23. The facility received her archived employee file from the Corporate office but failed to find the aide ever had any tuberculosis screening completed as per facility policy. Review of the Tuberculosis Control Plan and Screening for Employees policy dated 12/7/2023 indicated new employees will have a…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-05-09 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — pattern
    Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to ensure 4 of 5 residents were educated about immunizations and offered the Influenza and Pneumococcal vaccination annually (Resident #20, #39, #15, and #34). The facility reported a census of 38 residents. Findings include: 1. Record review of Resident #20 Electronic Health Record (EHR) Immunizations on 5/9/24 revealed she had not received the following: a. Pneumococcal Polysaccharide (PPSV23) b. Pneumococcal Conjugated (PCV20) Record review of Resident #20 Progress Notes 2/28/2020 to 5/9/24 lacked documentation that education was provided or that she was given or refused PPSV23 and PCV20 vaccinations (for Pneumonia). 2. Record review of Resident #39 EHR Immunizations on 5/9/24 revealed he was not up to date with Pneumococcal vaccinations. Record review of Resident #39 Progress Notes 11/30/2023 to 5/9/24 lacked documentation that education was provided or that he was given or refused Pneumococcal vaccines. 3. Record review of Resident #15 EHR Immunizations on 5/9/24 revealed he was not up to date with…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-09 · tag F0622 — isolated
    Not transfer or discharge a resident without an adequate reason; and must provide documentation and convey specific information when a resident is transferred or discharged.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to send appropriate records for a transfer to the local emergency room (ER) for 1 of 1 residents reviewed (Resident #42). The facility reported a census of 38 residents. Findings include: Record review of Resident #42 Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] documented he was discharged on 4/5/24 to the local hospital. The MDS informed his cognitive skill for daily decision making was severely impaired. Record review of Resident #42 Assessments in his Electronic Health Record (EHR) lacked documentation a discharge Assessment was completed on 4/5/24. Record review of Resident #42 Progress Notes on 4/5/24 lacked documentation of what paperwork was sent with the resident to the local hospital. During an interview on 5/9/24 at 10:40 AM the facilities Administrator revealed when Resident #42 went to the hospital on 4/5/24 they did not update the hospital or send documents regarding ADL's, his Care Plan, or what personal belongings were being…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-05-09 · tag F0641 — isolated
    Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff and pharmacist interview, the facility inaccurately coded 2 of 2 residents Minimum Data Set (MDS) by documenting the residents received insulin during the look back period when they did not (Resident #4 and #10). The facility reported a census of 38 residents. Findings include: 1. The MDS for Resident #4 dated 2/15/24 documented she received one insulin injection between 2/9/24 to 2/15/24. Record review of Resident #4 Treatment Administration Record (TAR) for February 2024 revealed she did not receive insulin medications. 2. The MDS for Resident #10 dated 2/22/24 documented she received one insulin injection between 2/16/24 to 2/22/24. Record review of Resident #10 TAR for February 2024 revealed she did not receive insulin medications. During an interview on 5/8/24 at 11:16 AM with the facilities Nurse Consultant revealed Trulicity is an insulin and provided TAR for Resident #4 and #10 showing they received the Trulicity injection during their MDS look back period. During an interview on 5/8/24 at 11:18 AM with one of the facilities Pharmacists revealed…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2024-05-09 · tag F0758 — failed to limit and justify psychotropic drugs — isolated
    Implement gradual dose reductions(GDR) and non-pharmacological interventions, unless contraindicated, prior to initiating or instead of continuing psychotropic medication; and PRN orders for psychotropic medications are only used when the medication is necessary and PRN use is limited.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on record review, staff interview, and policy review the facility failed to provide documentation of what interventions were attempted prior to giving as needed (PRN) anti-anxiety medications for 1 of 3 residents reviewed for anti-anxiety medications (Resident #22). The facility reported a census of 38 residents. Findings include: Record review of Resident #22's March 2024 Medication Administration Record (MAR) documented he received his once a day PRN anti-anxiety medication on the following dates: a. 3/2/24 b. 3/3/24 c. 3/4/24 d. 3/5/24 e. 3/7/24 f. 3/8/24 g. 3/9/24 h. 3/10/24 i. 3/11/24 j. 3/12/24 k. 3/13/24 l. 3/16/24 m. 3/18/24 Record review of Resident #22's Progress Notes from 3/4/24 to 3/18/24 lacked documentation of non-pharmacological interventions attempted prior to giving his PRN anti-anxiety medication. Record review of Resident #22's Progress Notes by the Pharmacy Consultant from 2/4/24 to 5/3/24 lacked direction to staff that they needed to document interventions attempted prior to giving PRN anti-anxiety medications. During an interview on 5/9/24 at 10:42 AM…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Pharmacy Service Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • No harm found · Bcited before2025-03-13 · tag F0644 — pattern
    Coordinate assessments with the pre-admission screening and resident review program; and referring for services as needed.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on an electronic health record (EHR) review, policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to submit a new Preadmission Screening and Resident Review (PASRR) assessment for 1 of 1 resident reviewed (Resident #14). The facility reported a census of 42 residents. Findings include: Resident #14 Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] identified a Brief Interview for Mental Status (BIMS) score of 3 indicating severe cognitive impairment. The MDS included diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, Schizophrenia, and Depression. Resident #14 current PASRR Level 1 Screening Outcome dated 3/2/2022 reflected a PASRR Level 1 outcome referral for a Level II onsite visit. The Notice of PASRR Level II outcome dated 3/8/22 revealed a PASRR determination of Level II -Excluded from PASRR - No PASRR diagnosis. On 3/11/25 a review of the EHR medical diagnoses list documented on 11/8/24 an active diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. The Resident #14 Order Summary Report included a listing of all active diagnoses,…

    This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction

“Cited before” means this same F-tag appears on at least one other survey date in the record we hold — counting complaint investigations as well as standard surveys, with no time limit. It is our own read of the data, not CMS’s: CMS uses repeat deficiency as a formal term tied to consecutive standard surveys, and that is a narrower test than this one. A tag marked here may or may not meet it.

Worried about a resident here? There are three different people you can turn to, and they do different jobs:
  • Long-Term Care Ombudsman — a free, confidential advocate for the resident. They act only with the resident’s consent and work to resolve the problem. Find yours at theconsumervoice.org/get_help.
  • Adult Protective Services — the state agency that investigates suspected abuse, neglect, or exploitation of a vulnerable adult. Not sure of your state’s APS number? The federal Eldercare Locator will route you: 1-800-677-1116 or eldercare.acl.gov.
  • State survey agency — the regulator that licenses and inspects the home. Every state has an official nursing-home complaint line and most take complaints online; the Ombudsman or Eldercare Locator can connect you.
Not sure where to start, or need other help? Dial 2-1-1 for local resources — and if a call is hard or impossible for you, many local 211s also take a text (send your ZIP code to 898-211) or a web chat at 211.org; both vary by area, and 211.org will show what yours offers. Deaf or hard of hearing: dial 711 for the telecommunications relay service, then any number above. In an emergency, call 911.
It is illegal for a facility to retaliate against a resident or family for reporting a concern: federal law gives a resident the right to voice grievances — to the home or to any outside agency — without discrimination or reprisal (42 CFR §483.10(j)(1)). You may report anonymously.

Fines & penalties

No federal fines in the current CMS record.

Part of a chain

This home belongs to GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY — 92 facilities. Here is how its ratings compare with the chain’s average across all its homes: See the whole chain — ratings, flags, fines and finances →

RatingThis homeChain avg
Overall 3 of 53.0≈ chain avg
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 3 of 54.0-1.0 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 52.8+1.2 vs chain
The other 91 homes this chain runs (chain average 3.0★, per CMS)
1 of 5Edgebrook Care CenterEdgerton, MN 1 of 5Good Samaritan - IndianolaIndianola, IA 1 of 5Good Samaritan - Red OakRed Oak, IA 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - AtkinsonAtkinson, NE 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - BlackduckBlackduck, MN 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Grand Island VillageGrand Island, NE 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - LakotaLakota, ND 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Mary Jane BrownLuverne, MN 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - St Luke's VillageKearney, NE 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society - WindomWindom, MN 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society De SmetDe Smet, SD 1 of 5Good Samaritan Society MillerMiller, SD 1 of 5Salem Lutheran HomeElk Horn, IA 1 of 5Souris Valley Care CenterVelva, ND 1 of 5St Vincent's - A Prospera CommunityBismarck, ND 1 of 5Sunset Drive - a Prospera CommunityMandan, ND 2 of 5Good Samaritan - AtwoodAtwood, KS 2 of 5Good Samaritan - Decatur CountyOberlin, KS 2 of 5Good Samaritan - EsthervilleEstherville, IA 2 of 5Good Samaritan - MansonManson, IA 2 of 5Good Samaritan - OttumwaOttumwa, IA 2 of 5Good Samaritan - WaukonWaukon, IA 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - BottineauBottineau, ND 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Hastings VillageHastings, NE 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - OakesOakes, ND 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Park RiverPark River, ND 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Specialty Care CommunityRobbinsdale, MN 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - St John'sKearney, NE 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - St Martin VillageRapid City, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - SuperiorSuperior, NE 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society - Waconia And Westview AcreWaconia, MN 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society CantonCanton, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society Luther ManorSioux Falls, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society New UnderwoodNew Underwood, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls CenterSioux Falls, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls VillageSioux Falls, SD 2 of 5Good Samaritan-LiberalLiberal, KS 2 of 5The Good Samaritan Society-Kissimmee VillageKissimmee, FL 3 of 5Good Samaritan - AlgonaAlgona, IA 3 of 5Good Samaritan - DavenportDavenport, IA

Showing 40 of 91; lowest-rated first.

A home rated well below its chain’s average can signal local problems; a chain with a low average across the board is a bigger pattern worth researching. CMS chain data under-reports private-equity and REIT ownership, so treat this as a floor, not the full picture.

Who owns this facility

Owner / managerTypeRoleShareSince
SANFORDOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 01/01/2019
BROWN, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
DYKHOUSE, DANAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
ENGBRECHT, WESLEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
GASSEN, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICERsince 05/30/2024
GULSVIG, NEILIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
HERSETH SANDLIN, STEPHANIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
LUNDEEN, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
MCCAUSLAND, MAUREENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
MOLBERT, LAURISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
NORTH, ANDREWIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
SCHIEFFER, KEVINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
SHULKIN, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
TEIKEN, BRENTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
VENTLING-HERRMANN, MARNIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/30/2024
WENZEL, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 01/01/2025
FLUIT, JOELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 10/01/2022
MIDDLETON, AIMEEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/27/2022
OLSON, NICHOLASIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 04/08/2024
SCHEMA, NATHANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/01/2022
LEDERMAN, MORDECHAIIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/13/2017
MICHAEL, CHALEEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 06/12/2023
MORRISON, TONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019

CMS files one row per role, so the 27 rows in the source record cover these 23 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

1 organizational owner listed — a facility can be part of a larger chain. CMS ownership data is known to under-report private-equity and REIT ties; treat as a starting point.

Follow the money — this home’s finances

Where a nursing home’s revenue comes from and where it goes — including money paid to companies under the same ownership. Most consumer sites never show this; we reproduce it straight from the Medicare cost report.

$4.9M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+2.8%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$834K
Related-party expense17% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 52%Medicare 3%Other / private 45%

This home reported $834K paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 17% of its total expenses. Money routed to affiliated companies can leave a home’s own books looking lean while owners still profit; it is the mechanism regulators watch most closely in private-equity and REIT deals.

Source: CMS Healthcare Provider Cost Reporting Information System (HCRIS), Medicare cost report Form CMS-2540 · fiscal year 2023. Facilities self-file these reports; figures are unaudited and a year or two behind. A home with no Medicare cost report on file shows no figures here.

Cost & finances

$273per resident / day
operating cost
$8,309per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$281per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2023). These are its operating economics — what it costs to run per resident-day and what it collects on average across Medicare, Medicaid, and private pay — not a private-pay quote. Your out-of-pocket cost depends on payer and room type, so ask the facility directly; a higher operating cost can reflect richer staffing or a sicker population. The cost-of-care planner shows regional benchmarks by care type.

What families pay in IA

Paying with Medicaid

This is a Medicare- and Medicaid-certified nursing home, so it can accept Medicaid for long-term care — like nearly all U.S. nursing homes. The private-pay figures below are what families without Medicaid pay; once a resident qualifies for Medicaid, out-of-pocket cost for covered nursing-home care is typically close to $0 (almost all of their income goes to the home as their share of the cost; they keep a small personal needs allowance — for clothing, haircuts, a phone — and Medicaid pays the rest). The amount of that allowance is set by each state. Confirm Medicaid-bed availability with the home, and see the Iowa Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Iowa
$9,277/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$10,038/mo
Nursing home (private)
$5,381/mo
Assisted living

Median private-pay cost, CareScout (Genworth) 2025 Cost of Care Survey — a regional midpoint, not any single community’s rate. Private rooms and higher care levels cost more; ask for a current quote. Project your own in the cost-of-care planner.

Every figure above is reproduced from the CMS Provider Data Catalog (a public record), from the CMS extract processed 2026-08-01 — CMS provider number 165187. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-03-12, which can lag current conditions. Staffing hours are CMS PBJ CY2026Q1 (Jan–Mar 2026). Check this record against the government’s own page for it: this home on Medicare Care Compare ↗ — the authoritative source, and the place to confirm anything here before you act on it. How we present it →

Not a government site. Eldercare Lens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authorized by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Medicare, or any government agency. The star ratings, citations, and inspection wording on this page are reproduced from the public CMS record; the plain-English summaries, tiers, and comparisons around them are ours. We do not speak for CMS, and CMS has not reviewed this page. For the official record, go to Medicare Care Compare. How we’re funded →

Are you this operator? If the record here is out of date, or misses what you have since fixed, tell us and we will look: hello@eldercarelens.com. We reproduce the public CMS record and cannot change what it says — corrections to the underlying data go through CMS and your state survey agency — but we will correct anything we have got wrong about it, and we will say so on the page.

What to do next