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

Good Samaritan Society - Maplewood

550 Roselawn Avenue East, Saint Paul, MN 55117 · Non profit - Corporation · 71 certified beds · (651) 774-9765 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (651) 774-9765 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
Abuse-prevention, restraint, or reporting citations — no harm found (F0609, F0610) — most recent Dec 2023Behavioral-health or dementia-care citation — no harm found (F0758)1 actual-harm citation
Insights

The public record raises real questions here. Weigh the concerns below carefully.

In its favor
  • no federal fines or payment denials on record
  • a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
  • lower-than-typical staff turnover (32% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
  • fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
Worth asking about
  • it has citations for its abuse-prevention policies, restraint use, or reporting and investigating of allegations (F0609, F0610) — cited below the harm level, meaning inspectors found the process wanting but did not find a resident harmed
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • a high number of inspection citations overall (33) — worth reading through, though larger and more-often-surveyed homes tend to accrue more lower-severity tags
  • its payroll- and facility-reported staffing and quality-measure scores sit well above its independent inspection score
  • its independent health-inspection rating is low (2/5)
  • 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 2 of 5
StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) 5 of 5
Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility 4 of 5

Worth a closer look. This home's staffing and quality-measure ratings run 3 stars above its independent health-inspection score. The inspection is done by state surveyors; the quality-measure score leans on data the facility reports about itself, and staffing on its payroll (PBJ) submissions — so a gap this large is worth reading the inspection record for.

Location & what’s nearby

Hospital
★★★★★ 5/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
1983 Sloan Pl #1 · (651) 326-5700 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
177 County Road B E · (651) 483-2000 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1673 Payne Ave · (651) 359-4866 · Call to confirm hours
Park
2001 Bradley St · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
380 Roselawn Ave E · (651) 771-1209

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 2 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 5 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 3 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 rating3★
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 increased19.6%18.2%15.4%worse
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight2.7%4.1%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.8%1.9%0.9%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.9%2.6%2.0%typical
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms0.0%4.1%6.5%check this — see note marked star below the table
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.1%0.1%better
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury4.4%4.0%3.3%worse
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened27.0%20.5%16.1%worse
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication6.8%12.5%18.9%better
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine95.5%96.1%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers9.2%5.2%4.7%worse
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control31.7%24.5%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table19.4%17.1%17.1%worse
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.6%1.9%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine68.4%82.7%79.4%worse
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission17.5%23.5%22.6%better
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit5.1%14.8%12.0%better

* 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.

62.9% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — CMS rates that better than the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 111 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

62.9%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
9.9%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
34.8%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.42U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.21hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.13hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.08hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 34.8% of this home’s Medicare short-stay residents left it at or above the ability to care for themselves and move around that CMS predicted for them, across 46 stays in Oct 2024–Sep 2025. The median of the 11,061 homes CMS publishes this for is 56.6%. Read it beside the getting-home figure, not instead of it: unlike the two measures above, CMS makes no better-or-worse call on this one and publishes no confidence interval for it, so this is a comparison and not a verdict — but it is the short-stay measure that separates homes most, and the one to ask about.

Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.42 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 72% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.

Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 16% of this home’s weekday level — it runs some therapy at the weekend, at a lower level than on weekdays. 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 SNF62.9%CMS range 54.3–68.951.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024better than U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF9.9%CMS range 6.7–13.510.7%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 discharge34.8%56.6%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge37.0%52.8%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge23.9%50.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 discharge100.0%98.7%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay0.0%0.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened1.8%1.9%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this measure
Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization6.3%CMS range 3.5–11.97.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.961.02Oct 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

1.64
RN hours/ resident / day
0.49
LPN hours/ resident / day
2.27
Aide hours/ resident / day
4.41
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
1.07
RN hoursweekends
32.0%
Total nursing turnover
40.0%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 71 beds and averages 63.2 residents a day — about 89% occupied, or roughly 8 beds typically open. It runs fairly full. 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 4.41 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.64 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.27 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 3.87 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.62 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.87 to 1.07 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 32% is below the national median of 45%.

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 (2025-08-28)
11
at the previous standard inspection (2024-08-22)

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.

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.

33 citations, most serious first. The 11 most serious are shown; the remaining 22 are one tap away and print in full.

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2023-12-18 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 comply with resident rights to refuse treatment for 1 of 4 residents (R1) reviewed when staff proceeded with a urinary straight catheterization while R1 verbally and physically refused the procedure. R1 has had increased anxiety since the straight catheterization procedure. Findings include: R1's Minimal Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE]. R1's pertinent primary medical conditions indicated on the MDS included anxiety disorder, morbid obesity, metastatic breast cancer, pathological fracture of the left tibia (shin bone) and generalized muscle weakness. R1 had no cognitive deficits. R1 was dependent upon staff with toileting and lower body dressing and transfers. R1 required maximum assistance from staff with upper body dressing and bathing. R1's treatment administration record (TAR) with a start date 10/30/23 at 3:00 p.m., end date 10/31/23 at 4:01 p.m. indicated postvoid residuals (PVRs) (a scan of the bladder…

    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 before2026-05-12 · 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 observation, interview, and documentation, the facility failed to assess and monitor non-pressure skin conditions for 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for skin management.R1R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had intact cognition, no mood or behavior concerns, and no rejection of care. R1 required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, oral hygiene, personal hygiene; substantial/maximal assistance for upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on/taking off footwear, rolling left and right, sit to lying/lying to sitting on bed side, sitting to standing, chair/bed-to-chair transfers; and dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, showering, toilet transfers. R1 had an indwelling catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowel. R1's diagnoses included hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), renal failure, diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, and glaucoma.R1's care plan undated, indicated R1 had diabetes mellitus and directed staff to wash feet daily 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-05-12 · tag F0690 — failed to manage incontinence, catheters, and urinary infections — isolated
    Provide appropriate care for residents who are continent or incontinent of bowel/bladder, appropriate catheter care, and appropriate care to prevent urinary tract infections.
    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 monitor urine output for 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) and failed to report, monitor, and document urine characteristics for 1 of 1 (R2) resident who was observed for staff emptying catheter bag. In addition, the facility failed to document catheter cares for 3 of 3 residents (R1, R2, and R3) and failed to store a catheter bag in a manner to reduce risk of infection for 1 of 1 resident (R3) who was observed to have a leg drainage bag during the day and larger catheter bag overnight.Findings include:R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had intact cognition, no mood or behavior concerns, or rejection of care. R1 required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, oral hygiene, personal hygiene; substantial/maximal assistance for upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on/taking off footwear, rolling left and right, sit to lying/lying to sitting on bed side, sitting to standing, chair/bed-to-chair…

    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 · Dcited before2026-05-12 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were available for administration per physician order for 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for medication errors.Findings includeR1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had intact cognition, no mood or behavior concerns, or rejection of care. R1 required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, oral hygiene, personal hygiene; substantial/maximal assistance for upper body dressing, lower body dressing, putting on/taking off footwear, rolling left and right, sit to lying/lying to sitting on bed side, sitting to standing, chair/bed-to-chair transfers; and dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, showering, toilet transfers. R1 had an indwelling catheter and was frequently incontinent of bowel. R1's diagnoses included hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), renal failure, diabetes mellitus, malnutrition, and glaucoma.R1's Discharge summary dated [DATE], indicated R1 admitted to the hospital…

    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 · Dcited before2026-05-12 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure enhanced barrier precautions (EBPs) and infection control measures were followed for 1 of 1 resident (R2) reviewed for urinary catheters.Findings include:Centers for Disease Control and Prevention defined EBP as the use of gown and gloves during high-contact resident care activities that provide opportunities for transfer of MDROs (multidrug-resistant organism; microorganisms, such as bacteria, which are resistant to one or more antimicrobial drugs) to staff hands and clothing.R2's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R2 had intact cognition and required setup or clean-up assistance with eating, personal hygiene, and oral hygiene and was dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, showering, dressing, bed and wheelchair mobility, and transfers. R2 had an indwelling catheter and diagnoses which included atrial fibrillation, heart failure, hypertension, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), urinary tract infection,…

    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 · Ecited before2026-03-24 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — pattern
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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 record review the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for two out of four residents (R5, R7) when the care plan did not include dialysis services, goals/outcomes, and interventions. Findings include:R5's provider order dated 1/23/26 indicated R5 was to receive dialysis at an outside dialysis center on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. R5's dialysis treatment was to start at 2:15 p.m. R5 would use a transportation company to bring him from the facility to the outside dialysis center. R5's care plan dated 1/23/26 did not include dialysis services, goals/outcomes, and interventions. R5's MDS dated [DATE] indicated R5 was admitted to the facility with a primary diagnosis of fractures and other multiple traumas. R5's additional diagnosis included dependence on renal dialysis. The MDS indicated R5 was on dialysis. R5's progress notes did not indicate what type of dialysis access he had. R7's provider order dated 2/9/26 indicated R7 was to receive dialysis at an outside dialysis…

    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 · E2026-03-24 · tag F0698 — failed to provide proper dialysis care — pattern
    Provide safe, appropriate dialysis care/services for a resident who requires such services.
    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 record review, the facility failed to ensure residents who required dialysis receive such services that were consistent with professional standards of practice for three out of five (R1, R5, R7) residents when the facility failed to assess the residents before and after dialysis. The facility failed to ensure licensed nurses had appropriate education to care for and assess residents who received dialysis for 26 out of 34 licensed nurses. Findings include:R1's hospital medical records dated 11/15/25 indicated R1 would be transferred to the facility after surgical repair of hip fracture after a fall at home. R1's additional diagnoses included end stage renal disease on dialysis and anemia in chronic kidney disease. The medical records indicated R1 would continue receiving hemodialysis through left arm fistula at an outside provider on Monday's, Wednesday's, and Friday's. R1's treatment administration record (TAR) dated 11/18/25 to 11/21/25 did not identify dialysis ongoing monitoring 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Ecited before2025-08-28 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — pattern
    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, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure unpasteurized eggs were fully cooked and prepared in a manner to prevent/decrease the risk of foodborne illness. This had the potential to affect up to 40 residents residing at the facility who ate undercooked eggs weekly. Findings include: A facility invoice for the periods of 8/7/25, 8/14/25, and 8/21/2025 indicated the facility received 115 dozen whole large white eggs on each order. The invoices did not include an indication that these eggs were pasteurized (a process used to eliminate bacteria and disease-producing microorganisms in foods, such as dairy). A Shopping Cart record dated 8/27/25 at 2:00 p.m., indicated the facility had a case of medium shelled pasteurized eggs in their shopping cart. A facility invoice indicated these shelled pasteurized eggs had been delivered on 8/28/25.During an observation and interview on 8/25/25 at 11:41 a.m., an unopened 15 dozen box of eggs was observed in a double-door refrigerator. There were no markings on the box to indicate the eggs had been…

    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 · Ecited before2025-08-28 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — pattern
    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 observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure insulin pens were stored in a manner to prevent cross-contamination in 3 of 3 medication carts on the transitional care unit (TCU). This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents who required insulin administration via an insulin pen who resided in the facility.Findings include: During observation and interview on 8/27/25 at 10:38 a.m., registered nurse (RN)-E was at the one of three medication carts on TCU preparing medication administration. RN-E removed an insulin pen from a plastic cup in a red tote in the bottom of the medication drawer. The plastic cup contained other insulin pens prescribed for multiple residents, no barrier noted between the pens. RN-E stated this was the way the insulin pens had always been stored after opening and stated they were all in one cup, touching each other without a barrier between. During observation and interview on 8/27/25 at 12:22 p.m., RN-F opened remaining two of three medication carts on TCU. RN-F stated there were several different…

    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 · Dcited before2025-08-28 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolated
    Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.
    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 resident specific advanced directive orders were accurately reflected throughout the medical record for 1 of 1 resident (R75) investigated for advanced directives (AD).R75's face sheet (undated) indicated diagnoses of wedge compression fracture of the T11-T12 vertebra, congestive heart failure (CHF), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). R75's Brief interview of Mental Status (BIMS) assessment dated [DATE], indicated intact cognition. R75's Functional Ability assessment dated [DATE], indicated R75 required assistance from staff with most activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility. R75's physician's orders indicated the following:-[DATE] advanced directive DNR-[DATE] attempt CPR R75's face sheet banner in Point Click Care (computer program) indicated code status (Advance Directive) of Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) and to attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR). R75's Physician's Order for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) dated [DATE], indicated…

    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 before2025-08-28 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure range of motion (ROM) was completed according to therapy recommendations for 1 of 1 resident (R4) reviewed for ROM. Findings include: R4's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R4's cognition was not assessed. R4 had impairment of upper and lower extremities on both sides and was dependent on staff for all mobility, transfers, and all activities of daily living (ADL), R4's MDS indicated R4 had received physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) and zero minutes of restorative nursing to include active and passive range of motion (PROM). R4 did not exhibit rejection of care behaviors and had diagnoses including cerebral infarction (stroke), cognitive communication deficit, and quadriplegia (paralysis affecting all limbs). R4's care plan dated 7/30/25, indicated R4 had a need for restorative intervention due to limited mobility and required passive ROM to bilateral upper and lower extremities and neck…

    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
Show the remaining 22 citations
  • Potential for harm · F2024-08-22 · tag F0867 — failed to act on quality-improvement findings — widespread
    Set up an ongoing quality assessment and assurance group to review quality deficiencies and develop corrective plans of action.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA)/Quality Assurance Process improvement (QAPI) committee was effective in implementing appropriate action plans to correct quality deficiencies identified in previous surveys related to weekly skin assessments which resulted in deficiencies identified during this survey. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all 61 residents in the facility. The Certification and Survey Provider Enhanved Reports (Casper)-3 assessment (data was converted to quality measures (QM) to evaluate nursing homes performance) dated 8/11/24, identified the following previous deficiency by month and year. -F686 Treatment/services to prevent/heal pressure ulcers at a scope and severity level of a D. See also F686 Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure weekly skin assessments were completed for 2 of 3 (R3, R12) residents reviewed for pressure ulcer risk. Monthly QAPI meeting minutes dated 5/26/23, indicated performance improvment plan (PIP) for high risk…

    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.

    Administration Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Fcited before2024-08-22 · 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 R42 R42's face sheet printed [DATE], indicated diagnoses of pneumonia, heart failure, and diabetes R42's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE] indicated R42 had moderate cognitive impairment, no upper or lower extremity impairment, uses a wheelchair, dependent on staff for toileting hygiene, bathing, lower body dressing, and substantial assist for personal hygiene and bed mobility. R42 was frequently incontinent of urine and always incontinent of bowel. R42 has moisture associated skin damage (MASD) R42's careplan indicated R42 required enhanced barrier precautions related to open wounds. Interventions included wearing gown and gloves when performing high contact are activities including dressing, bathing, transferring, providing hygiene, changing linens, repositioning, and/or wound care. R42's Kardex printed [DATE] directed staff to don gown and gloves when performing high contact care activities such as dressing, transferring, bathing, hygiene, changing linens, repositioning, and wound 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.

    Infection Control Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · E2024-08-22 · tag F0584 — failed to keep a safe, clean, comfortable home — pattern
    Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
    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 reclining foot rests functioned appropriately for 1 of 1 resident (R212) and failed to ensure a clean communal shower room which had the potential to affect all residents who used the shower room. Findings include, R212's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) in progress dated 8/15/24, indicated intact cognition, had coronary artery disease and hypertension (high blood pressure), acute myocardial infarction (heart attack), presence of an aortocoronary bypass graft, and had an encounter for surgical after care following surgery on the circulatory system. R212's physician orders form indicated the following order: 8/16/24, bumetanide 1 milligram (MG) by mouth daily for edema (fluid collecting in body tissues) and shortness of breath. R212's care plan dated 8/12/24, identified R212 took a diuretic. During interview on 8/19/24, at 1:13 p.m., R212 stated she mentioned to a few staff that the recliner chair did not work when trying to…

    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 · Ecited before2024-08-22 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — pattern
    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 observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure 3 of 4 residents (R18, R4, R12) reviewed for skin alterations had weekly skin observations completed. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure bruising was assessed and monitored for 1 of 3 resident (R12 ) reviewed for bruising and a skin tear was assessed and monitored for 1 of 2 residents (R18) reviewed for pressure injury. Findings include: R18's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R18 had cognitive impairment and diagnoses of heart disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and anxiety disorder. R18's MDS also indicated R18 was at risk for pressure injury, was always incontinent of bladder and bowel, and was dependent on staff for mobility. R18's care plan revised 4/3/24, indicated R18 had potential for pressure ulcer development related to impaired mobility, weakness, history of falls, and use of a diuretic. R18 further had a known pressure insult of suspected deep tissue injury to both feels. Interventions included…

    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 · Dcited before2024-08-22 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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 comprehensive care plans were developed for 1 of 1 resident (R50) and failed to ensure non-pharmacological interventions were developed and implemented for 1 of 1 resident (R110) reviewed for psychotropic drug use. Findings include: R50's admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated severe cognitive impairment, did not have little interest or pleasure in doing things, and did not feel down, depressed, or hopeless, did not have physical, verbal, or other behaviors, had diagnoses of dementia and depression and took an antipsychotic and antidepressant medication. R50's care area assessment (CAA) worksheet dated 7/16/24, indicated R50 took duloxetine (an antidepressant) and aripiprazole (an antipsychotic) for depression and psychotropic drug use would be addressed in the care plan in order to minimize risks. R50's physician orders indicated the following orders: 7/4/24, aripiprazole 20 milligrams (MG) by mouth once daily. 7/4/24, duloxetine…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 record review the facility failed to ensure routine incontinent care was provided for 1 of 3 residents (R18) reviewed for dependent activities of daily living (ADL's). Findings include: R18's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R18 had cognitive impairment and diagnoses of heart disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and anxiety disorder. R18's MDS also indicated R18 was always incontinent of bladder and bowel and required maximal assistance from staff for incontinent cares. R18's care plan revised 4/3/24, indicated R18 had incontinence related to impaired mobility, weakness, and use of a diuretic. Interventions included to monitor for signs of urinary tract infection, use incontinence products, check for incontinence frequently and provide brief change and incontinence cares as needed. R18's [NAME] printed 8/20/24, indicated R18 required frequent checks for incontinence and assistance with incontinence cares. A continuous observation on 8/20/24 at 10:58 a.m., R18…

    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 · Dcited before2024-08-22 · 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 record review the facility failed to ensure 1 of 2 residents (R18) who were at risk for pressure ulcers were repositioned in a timely manner to prevent pressure injury. Findings include: R18's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R18 had cognitive impairment and diagnoses of heart disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and anxiety disorder. R18's MDS also indicated R18 was at risk for pressure injury and was dependent on staff for mobility. R18's skin Care Area Assessment (CAA) indicated R18 was at risk for pressure injury due to immobility and weakness. A review of R18's nursing and provider orders showed: -on 3/21/24, R18 required cleansing and barrier cream to be applied to wounds on the right buttock and posterior thigh. -on 7/24/24, R18 required cleaning and skin prep applied to the right heel daily. R18's weekly skin observation dated 7/25/24, indicated R18 had a healing right heel wound and no other skin concerns. R18's medical record lacked evidence weekly…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolated
    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.
    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 record review, the facility failed to ensure speech therapy recommendations were followed for 1 of 3 residents (R18) reviewed for nutrition. Findings include: R18's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R18 had cognitive impairment and diagnoses of heart disease, Alzheimer's Disease, and anxiety disorder. R18's MDS also indicated R18 had no signs or symptoms of a swallowing disorder and required set up and clean up for meals. R18's diagnoses list printed on 8/20/24, indicated R18 had a secondary diagnosis of dysphagia (impaired swallowing). R18's hospital Discharge summary dated [DATE], indicated R18 had been hospitalized for an ankle fracture. R18 was assessed by speech therapy for dysphagia and had recently advanced to thin liquids and no straws. R18's hospital discharge orders dated 6/14/21, indicated R18 required a regular diet with thin liquids and no straws. R18's discharge orders also indicated R18 to follow speech therapy. R18's provider order dated…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0700 — isolated
    Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.
    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 1 of 1 residents (R12) reviewed for bedrails. R4's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated, intact cognition and diagnoses of displaced bicondylar fracture of right tibia, atrial fibrillation, and chronic kidney disease (CKD). It further indicated R4 required assistance from staff with most activities of daily living (ADL) and mobility. R4's physician's order dated 5/7/24, indicated okay to install assist bar. Follow manufacturers recommendations and specifications to promote independence with bed mobility. Risk vs benefit have been reviewed and consent form signed. No directions specified for order. R4's Informed Consent for Bed Rails, was signed by R4 on 5/13/24. During observation and inteview on 8/19/24 7:59 a.m., R4 was sitting in her room, registered nurse (RN)-D verified the bilateral side rails on her bed and stated all the residents have them for positioning. RN-D stated the resident needs to…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · tag F0756 — failed to review each resident's drug regimen — isolated
    Ensure a licensed pharmacist perform a monthly drug regimen review, including the medical chart, following irregularity reporting guidelines in developed policies and procedures.
    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 consulting pharmacist (CP) failed to address an appropriate indication for an antidepressant for 1 of 1 resident (R212) reviewed for psychotropic medications. Findings include: R212's comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) in progress dated 8/15/24, indicated intact cognition, had coronary artery disease and hypertension (high blood pressure), acute myocardial infarction (heart attack), presence of an aortocoronary bypass graft, and had an encounter for surgical after care following surgery on the circulatory system. Further, R212 did not have little interest or pleasure in doing things, and did not feel down, depressed, or hopeless. R212's physician orders dated 8/9/24, indicated R212 took bupropion (an antidepressant) HCL ER (extended release) 150 mg by mouth two times a day for status post CABG (coronary artery bypass grafting). R212's Medical Diagnosis form dated 8/21/24 at 1:39 p.m., indicated the following diagnoses: encounter for surgical aftercare following…

    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 · D2024-08-22 · 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 R50's admission Minimum Data Set, dated [DATE], indicated severe cognitive impairment, did not have little interest or pleasure in doing things, and did not feel down, depressed, or hopeless, did not have physical, verbal, or other behaviors, had diagnoses of dementia and depression and took an antipsychotic and antidepressant medication. R50's care area assessment (CAA) worksheet dated 7/16/24, indicated R50 took duloxetine (an antidepressant) and aripiprazole (an antipsychotic) for depression and psychotropic drug use would be addressed in the care plan in order to minimize risks. R50's physician orders indicated the following orders: • 7/4/24, aripiprazole 20 milligrams (MG) by mouth once daily. • 7/4/24, duloxetine 30 mg by mouth every evening, and 60 mg by mouth every morning. R50's orders lacked any monitoring for side effects of duloxetine and aripiprazole. R50's care plan was reviewed and lacked information R50 had depression and further lacked any monitoring for side effects of duloxetine and…

    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 · Dcited before2024-05-16 · tag F0755 — failed to provide safe pharmacy services — isolated
    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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to provide pharmacy services for one of one resident (R1) reviewed for medication administration. R1 did not receive her oxycodone (pain medication) when it was available in the facility's medication dispensing kit. Findings include: R1's admission record printed on 5/14/24 indicated R1 was admitted to the facility on [DATE] with a primary diagnoses of falls, generalized deconditioning, and left gluteal hematoma. R1's additional diagnoses included contusion of lower back and pelvis, repeated falls, dementia, psychotic disturbance, mood disturbance, anxiety, chronic kidney disease stage 3, muscle weakness, and difficulty walking. R1's minimum data set (MDS) dated [DATE] indicated R1 had a brief interview for mental status (BIMS) score was 14, indicating she was cognitively intact. R1's pain documentation on 4/22/24 at 10:23 a.m., indicated R1 had a pain score of eight out of ten. R1's pain documentation on 4/22/24 at 12:06 p.m., indicated R1 had a pain…

    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 · Fcited before2023-12-18 · 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

    Based on observation, interviews, and document review the facility failed to follow transmission-based precautions to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV2 (Covid-19), influenza, and clostridium difficile (c. diff) for 4 of 4 residents evaluated for infection control. The facility failed to practice proper hand hygiene, post the proper signage at a doorway, adhere to proper personal protective equipment (PPE), sanitize medical equipment following resident usage, and have proper doffing (taking off PPE) areas. This deficient practice had the potential to infect all 61 residents who resided at the facility. A Minnesota Department of Health resource titled Covid-19 Source Control (Masking), PPE, and Testing grid dated 9/15/23, https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/hcp/ppegrid.pdf indicated when a resident has tested positive for COVID-19, staff's PPE should consist of respirator, eye protection, isolation gown, and gloves. A Minnesota Department of Health resource titled Interim Guidance for Influenza Outbreak Management in Long-Term Care Facilities dated 1/10/23,…

    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 · D2023-12-18 · 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

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to immediate report, but not later than two hours after the allegation is made, to the state agency (SA) allegations of employee to resident physical and verbal abuse for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for abuse. R1's admission Minimal Data Set (MDS) date 11/5/23 indicated R1 had no cognitive deficits. R1 was dependent with toileting and lower body dressing and transfers. She required maximum assistance with upper body dressing and showering. R1's pertinent diagnoses were metastatic breast cancer, anxiety disorder, morbid obesity, and a pathological fracture of the left tibia (shin bone). A facility incident report dated 11/22/23 indicated R1 reported NA-A had yelled at her, telling her that no one liked her. R1 also stated NA-A ripped her brief off and hurt her hip during cares. NA-A made her feel bad for needing help. NA-A turned off all her lights and left her with no way to turn the lights on or call for help. R1 stated she was being abused by NA-A because of the treatment and the way her brief was taken off by NA-A. R1…

    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 · D2023-12-18 · tag F0610 — failed to investigate and act on abuse reports — isolated
    Respond appropriately to all alleged violations.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure allegations of verbal and physical abuse were thoroughly investigated for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed. R1 reported allegations of rough treatment leading to pain when staff would not stop a catheter procedure upon her request. In addition, R1 reported allegations of verbal and physical abuse by a nursing assistant (NA). A thorough investigation was not completed. Neither complaint allegations were reported to the state agency. The findings include: According to a facility incident report dated 11/22/23 R1's husband arrived at 1:30 p.m. to talk to R1 about what she believed happened to her with an encounter with staff member, NA-A that morning. R1 reported NA-A yelled at her, saying no one liked her. R1 stated NA-A ripped her brief off and hurt her hip. NA-A made her feel bad for needing help. NA-A also turned off all her lights and left her with no way to turn the lights on or call for help. R1 stated she had been abused by NA-A because of this treatment and the way her brief was taken off by NA-A. R1 called 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.

    Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-18 · tag F0656 — failed to write and follow a full care plan — isolated
    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
    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 develop a comprehensive person-centered care plan for mental and psychosocial needs including prevention, interventions, measurable objectives, and goals for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed. Findings include: R1's physician order dated 10/31/23 was for lorazepam (an anti-anxiety agent) oral tablet 0.5 milligrams (mg) three times a day. R1's care plan dated 10/31/23 - 12/5/23 did not indicate any focus, goal, or interventions for R1's anxiety. R1's physician order dated 10/31/23 was for Alprazolam (an anti-anxiety agent) tablet 0.25 mg by mouth every eight hours as needed for anxiety until 11/10/23. Notify provider on 11/10/23 of need to reassess medication. R1's physician order dated 10/31/23 was for hydroxyzine HCL (anti-anxiety agent) tablet 50 mg by mouth every six hours as needed for anxiety for ten days. Notify provider on 11/10/23 of need to reassess medication. R1's trauma assessment dated [DATE] consisted of one question, 1. Have you ever…

    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 · D2023-12-18 · tag F0842 — failed to keep accurate, complete medical records — isolated
    Safeguard resident-identifiable information and/or maintain medical records on each resident that are in accordance with accepted professional standards.
    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 medical record was complete and accurately documented for nursing and/or other licensed professional notes for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed when R1 had a straight catheterization procedure that was not recorded in the medical record for R1. Findings include: American Nursing Association, Principles for Nursing Documentation 2010, https://www.nursingworld.org/~4af4f2/globalassets/docs/ana/ethics/principles-of-nursing-documentation.pdf indicated documentation of nurses work is critical for effective communication with others and other disciplines. It provides a basis for demonstrating and understanding nursing contributions both to patient care outcomes and to the viability and effectiveness of the organizations that provide and support quality patient care. It is how nurses create a record of their services for use by communication within the health care team, communication with other professionals, credentialing, legal, regulation and…

    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 · Fcited before2023-09-28 · 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, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure water and ice dispensing machines were clean and free of excess mineral build up or cleaned on a regular schedule. This had the potential to affect all 59 residents residing in the facility. Findings include: During observation on 9/27/23 at 2:40 p.m., the ice/water machine on the post acute kitchenette had some unidentified brown substance on the drip tray and a small amount of white scale build up in and around the ice and water dispensing chutes. During observation on 9/27/23 at 2:44 p.m., the ice/water machine on the north unit had an excessive amount of white scale built up on the drip tray as well as in and around the ice and water dispensing chutes. During interview on 9/27/23 at 2:50 p.m., cook (C)-A stated the ice/water machine had a lot of scale build up and that maintenance was responsible to clean that. C-A further stated that the staff used this machine to dispense ice and water for the resident's consumption on the North unit. During interview on 9/28/23 at 8:04 a.m., food service…

    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 · D2023-09-28 · 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 interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure resident status was accurately reflected in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 1 of 1 residents (R46) reviewed for anticoagulants. Finding include: Centers for Medicare/Medicaid Service (CMS) long-term care (LTC) resident facility assessment instrument (RAI) 3.0 users manual version 1.17.1 dated 10/19, identified in section N medications under coding instructions indicated record the number of days an anticoagulant medication was used by the resident at any time during the 7-day look back period. Do not code antiplatelet medications such as aspirin/extended release, dipyridamole, or clopidogrel here. R46's initial assessment dated [DATE], identified R46 received six days of anticoagulant medication during the look-back period. R46's physician order's reviewed on 9/27/23 indicated R46 had an order in place for Clopidogrel Bisulfate Oral Tablet 75 MG (Clopidogrel Bisulfate) one tab by mouth daily for lacunar stroke; however, it lacked any evidence of…

    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 · Dcited before2023-09-28 · 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 interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure weekly skin assessments were completed for 2 of 3 (R3, R12) residents reviewed for pressure ulcer risk. Findings include: R3's significant change Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R3 was moderately cognitively impaired, required extensive assist of two for bed mobility, no behaviors exhibited, no rejection of care, and at risk for pressure ulcers. R3's pressure injury Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 6/28/23, indicated R3 was provided a pressure redistribution mattress. R3 was assessed routinely for amount of risk for skin breakdown. Staff assist R3 frequently and encourage significant offloading with pillows. R3's medical diagnosis sheet undated, indicated R3's diagnosis was acute on chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure (CHF - heart failure which is characterized by signs and symptoms of heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] greater than 50%), type II diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. R3's 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.

    Quality of Life and Care Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-09-28 · 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

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure an ordered range of motion (ROM) program was provided consistently for 1 of 1 resident (R22) reviewed for positioning and mobility. Findings include R22's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R22 was cognitively intact, required extensive assistance of two staff for bed mobility and transfers. Further, no exhibited behaviors including no rejection of care. R22's MDS revealed no active or passive ROM completed. R22's rehabilitation potential Care Area Assessment (CAA) dated 3/29/23, lacked any direction for ROM program. R22's care plan revised 5/9/23, indicated R22 had a need for restorative intervention due to limited physical mobility with interventions of active ROM exercises program to bilateral upper and lower extremities under the guidance of the restorative nursing assistant 1x/day 2 days/week. R22's ROM administration record dated September 2023, indicated ROM was provided to R22 only one time on…

    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
  • No harm found · C2023-12-18 · tag F0583 — failed to protect personal privacy — widespread
    Keep residents' personal and medical records private and confidential.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to ensure resident records that contained private, medical, and personal information were not accessible to unauthorized personnel when two unsecured cardboard boxes were left at a nurse's station that contained resident care plans and other resident medical information. The facility also failed to safeguard personal and medical information contained in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR) when three computers were left open in an area where any staff, visitor, or resident could view on three separate occasions. These deficient practices had the potential to affect all 61 residents who reside in the facility. Findings include: During an observation on 12/14/23 at 10:37 a.m., at the nursing station located on the first floor of the 102 wing, a computer at a nurse's station was unlocked for 5 minutes with resident care plan tasks visible. The nurse's station was in an open area in the middle of two resident care wings where any staff, visitor, or resident could walk behind. There was no staff sitting at the desk. During an…

    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

“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 2 of 52.8-0.8 vs chain
Staffing 5 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 INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 01/01/2019
THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETYOrganization5% OR GREATER INDIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST; ADP OF THE SNF100%since 01/01/2019
BROWN, GEORGEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
DYKHOUSE, DANAIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
ENGBRECHT, WESLEYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
GASSEN, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; CORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
GULSVIG, NEILIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
HERSETH SANDLIN, STEPHANIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
LUNDEEN, MARKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
MCCAUSLAND, MAUREENIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
MOLBERT, LAURISIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
NORTH, ANDREWIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
SCHIEFFER, KEVINIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
SHULKIN, DAVIDIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
TEIKEN, BRENTIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
VENTLING-HERRMANN, MARNIEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 05/30/2024
WENZEL, THOMASIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTOR; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2025
FLUIT, JOELIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; INDIVIDUAL IS AN OWNER, PARTNER OR TRUSTEE OF ANY ADP OF THE SNF; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/21/2026
MIDDLETON, AIMEEIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/27/2022
OLSON, NICHOLASIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 04/08/2024
SCHEMA, NATHANIndividualCORPORATE OFFICER; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2022
JENSEN, SUSANIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 10/01/2005
KARLINSKI, KARENIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 11/01/2018
MORRISON, TONYIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
SANDGREN, DEEANDRAIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL; ADP OF THE SNFsince 07/16/2023
DTN STAFFING INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
FOCUSONE SOLUTIONSOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 01/01/2019
GRAPE TREE MEDICAL STAFFING LLCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 04/13/2018
THRIFTY DRUG STORES INCOrganizationADP OF THE SNFsince 08/01/2017

CMS files one row per role, so the 56 rows in the source record cover these 29 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.

6 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.

$10.5M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
+12.4%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.6M
Related-party expense17% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 46%Medicare 11%Other / private 43%

This home reported $1.6M 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

$440per resident / day
operating cost
$13,369per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$502per 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 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 245221. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-08-28, 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