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

Good Samaritan Society - Jackson

601 West Jackson, Jackson, MN 56143 · Non profit - Corporation · 46 certified beds · (507) 847-3100 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (507) 847-3100 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citation — no harm found (F0609) — cited Jan 2024Behavioral-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 federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (31% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
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
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (15) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its payroll-based staffing score sits well above its independent inspection score
  • about 18% of its spending goes to commonly-owned related companies
  • its last standard health inspection was over 2 years ago — the star rating may not reflect current conditions

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.

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

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing rating runs 2 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the staffing score rests on the facility's own payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1850 Royal Avenue
Pharmacy
825 3rd St · (507) 847-3282 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
908 3rd St · (507) 847-2074 · Call to confirm hours
Park
1015 Sherman St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
311 N Sverdrup Ave · (507) 407-2944

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 3 of 5
Long-stay residentspeople who live here 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 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 held steady at 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 increased12.5%18.2%15.4%better
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight8.2%4.1%5.4%worse
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder1.4%1.9%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection0.0%2.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.2%4.1%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury2.8%4.0%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened15.3%20.5%16.1%typical
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication16.3%12.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine100.0%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers0.0%5.2%4.7%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control10.7%24.5%21.2%better
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.9%17.1%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication0.0%1.9%1.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission43.9%23.5%22.6%worse
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit24.5%14.8%12.0%worse

* This home reported 0% on a measure where lower is better. That can mean genuinely excellent care — but because the number is self-reported, a zero can also mean the problem was not recorded. Weigh it against the inspection record above.

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.

48.6% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 40 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

48.6%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
11.8%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
0.17U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.10hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.07hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.17 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 15% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% 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 SNF48.6%CMS range 36.2–67.751.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF11.8%CMS range 7.5–18.410.7%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
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 SNFs1.031.02Oct 2022–Sep 2024CMS makes no comparison for this 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

1.19
RN hours/ resident / day
0.58
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.29
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.07
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.74
RN hoursweekends
30.8%
Total nursing turnover
22.2%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 46 beds and averages 36.5 residents a day — about 79% occupied, or roughly 10 beds typically open. It usually has some room. 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 4.07 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.19 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.29 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 3.38 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.35 on weekdays — 22% thinner on weekends — a notable drop. RN hours go from 1.38 to 0.74 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 31% is below 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

3
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2024-09-05)
4
at the previous standard inspection (2023-07-20)

Deficiencies are fewer than at the previous inspection — improving. 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.

This trend is not current. The most recent of these two inspections was over 2 years ago; the arrow describes what inspectors found then, not what the home is like now.

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.

15 citations, most serious first. The 10 most serious are shown; the remaining 5 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Potential for harm · F2024-09-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — widespread
    Procure food from sources approved or considered satisfactory and store, prepare, distribute and serve food in accordance with professional standards.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure beverageware and metal pans were completely dry before storing to prevent bacterial growth. This had potential to affect all 41 residents who resided in the facility. Findings include: During an observation and interview on 9/3/24 at 2:05 p.m., with cook (C)-A observed multiple metal steam table pans stacked upside down, one on top of the other, on a shelving rack. When C-A removed the top pan, it had visible water on the inside surface. Two additional pans were lifted and had visible water on the inside surface. Multiple drink cups were stacked upside down on a solid plastic tray and condensation was visible in the clear tumblers. C-A acknowledged staff should not have put pans away while still wet and should not stack drink cups while still wet as that could promote bacterial growth. During interview on 9/5/24 at 9:50 a.m., certified dietary manager (CDM) verified that dishes should be allowed to air dry completely prior to being put away. The facility Safe Handling of Personal Food, Outside Food- Food and Nutrition…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · F2024-09-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — widespread
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    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 observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure appropriate infection prevention and control practices for hand hygiene and equipment cleaning/disinfection. Equipment cleaning/disinfection included a mechanical lift for 2 of 2 residents (R13, R5) which were not cleaned/disinfected after resident use. In addition, the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions were followed for 1 of 1 residents (R5) who had a wound. Findings include: Hand Hygiene On 9/4/24 at 12:04 p.m., Environmental Service Technician (EST)- A was observed bringing clean laundry into R6, R7, and R15's room without performing hand hygiene before entering and exiting the rooms. EST-A was observed touching closet doorknobs, hangers, and clean clothing while in resident rooms. On 9/5/24 9:19 a.m., RN-C confirmed hand hygiene should be done on entrance/exit of resident rooms, before and after donning gloves, and hands are to be washed with soap and water when visibly dirty. Mechanical Lift R13's…

    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 · D2024-09-05 · tag F0759 — failed to keep medication error rate low — isolated
    Ensure medication error rates are not 5 percent or greater.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure insulin was administered per standard of practice and manufacturer recommendations during 2 of 2 insulin administrations for 2 of 2 residents (R4, R20). The facility's medication error rate was greater than 5% at 6.9 percent (%) rate. Findings include: On observation and interview 9/4/24 at 11:00 a.m., registered nurse (RN)-A was observed preparing and administering insulin to R4 via a Humolog Kwikpen (instrument used to deliver insulin). RN-A completed blood glucose level using Libre Freestyle (a small sensor that automatically tracks glucose levels) which was 194. RN-A removed the cap off the Kwikpen, swabbed insulin pen port with alcohol and then attached a disposable needle to the rubber stopper at end of the pen. After attaching the needle to the Kwikpen, RN-A dialed to 1 unit, and primed pen (getting insulin ready to dose by getting rid of air that may collect in insulin pen) then dialed to 18 units and administered the insulin into R4's abdomen. RN-A confirmed she primed the needle with 1 unit…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2024-01-31 · 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 interview and document review the facility failed to report allegations of abuse timely to the State Agency (SA) for 3 of 4 residents (R1, R3, and R4) reviewed for allegations of abuse. Findings include: An anonymous Vulnerable Adult Maltreatment report submitted to the State Agency (SA) on 1/23/24 at 5:44 p.m., alleged caregiver abuse when employee (E)-A was observed on top of R1 with both knees pressed into R1's chest to hold her down. Further noted the alleged incident occurred on 12/30/23 at approximately 6:30 p.m. The report further noted (unidentified) staff reported the incident to the administrator, but no action was taken to protect the residents. An anonymous Vulnerable Adult Maltreatment report submitted to the SA on 1/25/24 at 6:05 p.m., alleged caregiver abuse when E-A was observed forcing R1 to stay in her chair by pinning her down and restraining her with full body weight. Further indicated the incident was reported to the director of nursing (DON) but no protections were put into place…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    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 observation, interview and document review the facility failed to provide a dignified dining experience for 2 of 2 residents (R13 and R14) who required assistance with dining. Findings Include: R13's admission record printed 7/20/23, identified a diagnoses of Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia and protein-calorie malnutrition. R13's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment, dated 5/26/23, identified severe cognitive impairment, and required extensive assist of 1 person with eating. R13 receiving hospice services. R13's care plan dated 6/9/23, identified an activities of daily living (ADL) self care performance deficit and may require up to total feeding and drinking assistance as her participation level in eating and drinking varies. R14's admission record printed 7/20/23, identified a diagnoses of dementia, hemiplegia and hemiparesis (paralysis of half of the body) right non-dominate side following cerebrovascular (affects blood flow to brain)disease, drug induced subacute dyskinesia…

    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 before2023-07-20 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to provide routine removal of facial hair for 1 of 2 residents (R7) reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs) who was dependent on staff for cares. Findings include: R7's admission Record printed 7/19/23, indicated diagnoses including end stage dementia, mood disturbance and anxiety, and polyneuropathy (damage to peripheral nerves with weakness, numbness and burning pain). R7's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated severe cognitive impairment, required extensive assistance of two staff for personal hygiene and no rejection of care behaviors. R7's care plan dated 4/6/23, indicated an ADL self-care performance deficit R/T [related to] functional and cognition deficits and requires one to two staff assist with personal hygiene, and resident prefers facial hair to be shaved when present requiring assistance of one staff as needed. On 7/17/23 at 2:40 p.m., R7 was observed with varied lengths 1/2 to one inch…

    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 · D2023-07-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    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 interview and document review the facility failed to implement bowel movement (BM) protocol for 1 of 1 resident (R8) reviewed for constipation. Findings include: R8's diagnosis report printed on 7/20/23 included history of colon cancer and stroke. R8's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated moderately impaired cognition, unclear speech, was usually understood and could sometimes understand. R8 who did not walk, required extensive assistance or was totally dependent upon one or two staff for all activities of daily living (ADL's). R8's physician orders included Senna (laxative) tablet 8.6 mg (milligrams); one tablet every 12 hours as needed for constipation. Facility standing orders (written protocols nurses could implement without first obtaining a physician order) for constipation included: 1. Dulcolax suppository (laxative). Insert 10 mg rectally as needed for constipation. Give daily as needed. Contact provider/practitioner if there are three days without 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-07-20 · tag F0686 — failed to prevent and treat pressure sores (bedsores) — isolated
    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.
    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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to assess, monitor and implement pressure relieving interventions for 2 of 2 resident (R14, R20) with known risks for pressure ulcer development. R20 developed a stage II pressure ulcer to one heel. Findings include: Stage II pressure ulcers (Partial thickness loss of dermis presenting as a shallow open ulcer with a red-pink wound bed, without slough. May also present as an intact or open/ ruptured blister.) R20's diagnosis report dated 7/18/23, included recent diagnoses of fracture of left femur and pressure ulcer of left heel. R20's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated moderately impaired cognition, clear speech, was understood and could understand. R20 required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility, transferring and toileting. The MDS indicated R20 was at risk for pressure ulcer and did not have a pressure ulcer. R20's physician or nursing orders included: --7/3/23, Measure left heel wound…

    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 · F2021-04-29 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — widespread
    Provide pharmaceutical services to meet the needs of each resident and employ or obtain the services of a licensed pharmacist.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a system for periodic reconciliation of controlled or narcotic medications in 1 of 1 emergency kit (E-Kit) and 3 of 3 refrigerators to prevent potential loss or diversion. This had the potential to affect any of the 39 residents present in the facility who may require controlled medications from the E-Kit and refrigerators. Findings include: On 4/26/21, at 6:40 p.m. a tour of the north unit medication room was conducted with licensed practical nurse (LPN)-B. Located within the medication room was a locked cabinet with an E-Kit. The E-kit was observed to have an unsecured green tag present and included lorazepam (an anti-anxiety medication/controlled substance), morphine (narcotic pain medication/controlled substance), diazepam (an anti-anxiety medication/controlled substance), and hydrocodone (a narcotic pain medication/controlled substance). LPN-B indicated if the E-Kit was opened and medications were removed, nursing staff would remove the red tag (which locked the E-Kit) and replaced with a green…

    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
  • Potential for harm · E2021-04-29 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — pattern
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure safe medication refrigerator temperatures were maintained in 2 of 2 nursing units (north and south) to ensure medication efficacy. This had the potential to affect all 39 residents. Findings include: On 4/26/21, at 7:02 p.m. during observation of the north unit medication room with licensed practical nurse (LPN)-B the medication refrigerator temperature log was reviewed and revealed the medication refrigerator was to be maintained between 36-46 degrees Fahrenheit (F). LPN-B confirmed there were temperatures out of range and no action was taken for the out-of-range temperatures. The medications in the south medication fridge included lorazepam 2 milligram (mg) vial, Novolog vial (insulin), insulin pen, and tuberculin. The April 2021 log for the north medication indicated the following temperatures were not within range: 4/3/21, 30 degrees F. 4/7/21, 30 degrees F. 4/17/21, 30 degrees F. 4/19/21, 28 degrees F. 4/20/21, 30 degrees F. 4/22/21, 34 degrees F. 4/24/21,32 degrees F. Interview on 4/28/21, at…

    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
Show the remaining 5 citations
  • Potential for harm · E2021-04-29 · tag F0804 — failed to serve food at safe, palatable temperature — pattern
    Ensure food and drink is palatable, attractive, and at a safe and appetizing temperature.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure food was served in a manner that was palatable to the residents. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 39 residents residing in the facility who consumed food from the kitchen. Finding include: During an interview on 4/26/21, at 2:37 p.m., R12 stated the food was very bad, adding that her family brought her a refrigerator for her room so she could keep her own food to eat. R12 stated she had told anybody who will listen [about the food] -- it's no secrete. R12 stated the dietary department was short staffed and the staff kept turning over. R12 stated the mixed vegetables were mush and cinnamon rolls on 4/25/21 were burnt on the bottom -- dry and hard -- and she could not eat the bottom of the roll. During an interview on 4/26/21, at 3:07 p.m., R7 stated the food was so bad, he got his own refrigerator and his daughter brought food in for him. R7 stated the quality of food is bad and the cooking is bad, adding he had told staff how bad it was, but nothing ever got done about it.…

    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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2021-04-29 · tag F0677 — failed to help fully-dependent residents with daily care — isolated
    Provide care and assistance to perform activities of daily living for any resident who is unable.
    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 observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to provide nail care for 1 of 1 resident (R2) who was dependent on staff for assistance with grooming and personal hygiene. Findings include: R2's facesheet printed on 4/29/21, indicated diagnoses that included vascular dementia without behavioral disturbances. R2's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated R2 had severe cognitive impairment, had adequate hearing and vision, clear speech, usually understood others and was sometimes understood. R2 was dependent upon staff for bed mobility, transfers, walking, dressing, toileting and hygiene. R2's plan of care, printed on 4/29/21, indicated R2 had an activity of daily living (ADL) self-care deficient related to dementia, with functional and cognitive deficiencies. In addition, the care plan indicated R2 needed assistance of one staff for personal hygiene; however refused cares such as shaving, oral care and changing into clean clothes. Furthermore, R2's care plan…

    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 · D2021-04-29 · tag F0693 — failed to provide proper feeding-tube care — isolated
    Ensure that feeding tubes are not used unless there is a medical reason and the resident agrees; and provide appropriate care for a resident with a feeding tube.
    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 observation, interview and document review the facility failed to provide appropriate gastrostomy tube flushing to prevent complications for 1 of 1 resident (R19) observed during medication administration. Findings include: R19 was admitted to the facility 12/14/18, with diagnoses including: hemiplegia (paralysis of one side of the body), hemiparesis (weakness or the inability to move on one side of the body), malignant neoplasm (abnormal mass) of the brain, gastritis (inflammation of the lining of the stomach), dysphagia (difficulty or discomfort in swallowing), and a gastrostomy tube (G-tube) for nutrition. R19's quarterly minimum data set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], identified R19 with no cognitive impairment, required total assistance with activities of daily living (ADL), and received nutrition via a feeding tube R19's orders dated 9/9/20, indicated flush with 30 cc (cubic centimeter) of sterile water before medications, 5 cc between medications and 30 cc after all medications. Document total…

    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 · D2021-04-29 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a gradual dose reduction (GDR) of a psychotropic medication was attempted or rationale provided for current dose justification for 2 of 5 residents (R18, R25) reviewed for unnecessary medication use. In addition the facility failed to identify specific parameters for use of an antipsychotic medication for 1 of 5 residents (R18) reviewed. Findings include: R18's Face Sheet printed 4/28/21, indicated diagnoses including: Alzheimer's disease, major depressive disorder, panic disorder, dementia, and wandering. R18's quarterly Minimum Date Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated resident had moderately impaired cognition, and exhibited behavioral symptoms not directed toward others daily. The MDS further indicated R18 experienced delusions and wandered 4-6 days, but less than daily during the assessment period. R18's physician orders dated 5/31/19, included: lorazepam 0.5 milligrams (mg) give one tablet orally every six hours as needed for…

    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
  • Potential for harm · D2021-04-29 · tag F0921 — failed to keep a safe, functional, sanitary building — isolated
    Make sure that the nursing home area is safe, easy to use, clean and comfortable for residents, staff and the public.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to provide a safe and sanitary environment for residents as a result of peeling ceiling paint in the kitchen over a food preparation surface. This had the potential to affect all 39 residents residing in the facility who consumed food from the kitchen. Findings include: During an observation on 4/28/21, at 11:05 a.m., peeling paint was noted on two areas of the kitchen ceiling. The ceiling was a solid, flat surface, painted a white/cream color. Directly over a metal food preparation surface was an area of peeling paint, including a flap of paint about the size of a hand, hanging down over the work surface. On the metal work surface was a jar of peanut butter and a knife. In addition, there was a circular area of peeling ceiling paint near the exit of the kitchen going into the dining room. This area was approximately 18-24 inches in diameter, with peeling paint around the perimeter of the circle. While this area of peeling paint was not directly above a food preparation surface, food was removed from the microwave and carried…

    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.

    Environmental 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 4 of 53.0+1.0 vs chain
Health inspection 3 of 52.8+0.2 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.0+1.0 vs chain
Quality measures 3 of 52.8+0.2 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
THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETYOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2019
KLINE, RONALDIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2024
MORRISON, TONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
SOLHEIM, PAIGEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 12/20/2020

CMS files one row per role, so the 28 rows in the source record cover these 24 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

2 organizational owners 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.

$6.8M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+14.3%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.1M
Related-party expense18% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 40%Medicare 3%Other / private 57%

This home reported $1.1M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 18% 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 2024. 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

$254per resident / day
operating cost
$7,713per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$296per day
avg. revenue, all payers

Straight from this home’s Medicare cost report (CMS, FY2024). 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 MN

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 Minnesota Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in Minnesota
$10,646/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$13,870/mo
Nursing home (private)
$6,573/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 245455. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2024-09-05, 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