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

Fargo Elim Health Care Center

3534 University Drive S, Fargo, ND 58104 · Non profit - Corporation · 88 certified beds · (701) 271-1862 Medicare & Medicaid certified

Call the home — (701) 271-1862 Need help choosing, fast? Free, unbiased: Eldercare Locator 1-800-677-1116
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 (35% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
Worth asking about
  • it has 1 actual-harm citation
  • 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)

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
★★★ 3/5 CMS · Emergency dept. usually open 24/7 · ER 24/7
Urgent care / clinic
2829 University Dr S · (701) 404-9909 · Call to confirm hours
Pharmacy
3240 15th St S · (701) 365-6050 · Call to confirm hours
Grocery
1532 32nd Ave S · (701) 280-1999 · Call to confirm hours
Park
3601 17th St S · (701) 499-6060 · Typically dawn to dusk
Place of worship
3481 University Dr S

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 5 of 5
Short-stay residentsrehab / post-hospital 2 of 5

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

Trend — is this home getting better or worse?

Over 2025-02 to 2026-06, this home’s CMS overall rating fell from 5 to 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 increased14.7%19.8%15.4%typical
Long-stay residents who lose too much weight1.2%5.8%5.4%better
Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder0.0%1.6%0.9%better
Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection1.1%2.6%2.0%better
Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms2.2%4.4%6.5%better
Long-stay residents who were physically restrained0.0%0.2%0.1%better than state — see note marked double-dagger below the table
Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury1.1%5.1%3.3%better
Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened13.5%17.6%16.1%better
Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication18.0%17.4%18.9%typical
Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine97.3%98.8%95.3%typical
Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers1.9%4.9%4.7%better
Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control24.8%24.9%21.2%worse
Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication — see the note below the table13.7%22.7%17.1%better
Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication2.4%1.5%1.4%worse
Short-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine93.3%88.3%79.4%better
Short-stay residents rehospitalized after admission24.9%19.9%22.6%typical
Short-stay residents with an outpatient ER visit12.8%11.4%12.0%typical
Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days1.141.491.67better
Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days1.591.861.80better

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.

51.1% of the Medicare patients who left this home got back to the community and stayed there for at least 31 days — which CMS reads as no different from the national rate. This is CMS’s risk-adjusted rate over 142 Medicare stays in Oct 2022–Sep 2024, and CMS’s own comparison — not ours.

51.1%U.S. median 51.5%
Got home and stayed home
12.4%U.S. median 10.7%
Went back to hospital
56.6%U.S. median 56.6%
Met the expected recovery
0.42U.S. median 0.31
Therapy hours / resident / day
0.20hours / resident / day
Physical therapy
0.17hours / resident / day
Occupational therapy
0.05hours / resident / day
Speech therapy

Met the expected recovery: 56.6% 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 106 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 1% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.

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

See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
MeasureThis homeU.S. medianPeriod coveredCMS’s call
Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF51.1%CMS range 43.8–58.551.5%Oct 2022–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF12.4%CMS range 9.2–15.910.7%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 discharge56.6%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 discharge49.1%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 discharge45.3%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 setting92.9%100.0%Oct 2024–Sep 2025CMS makes no comparison for this 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 stay0.7%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 worsened0.7%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 hospitalization6.1%CMS range 3.4–10.27.1%Oct 2023–Sep 2024no different from U.S.
Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs0.971.02Oct 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

1.37
RN hours/ resident / day
0.39
LPN hours/ resident / day
3.36
Aide hours/ resident / day
5.12
Total nurse hours/ resident / day
0.88
RN hoursweekends
35.0%
Total nursing turnover
35.7%
RN turnover

How full it usually is: this home is certified for 88 beds and averages 84.5 residents a day — about 96% occupied, or roughly 4 beds typically open. It runs essentially full — expect a waiting list. 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 5.12 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 1.37 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 3.36 is at or above 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 4.49 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 5.37 on weekdays — 16% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.57 to 0.88 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)

This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 35% 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

8
deficiencies at the latest standard inspection (2026-04-01)
2
at the previous standard inspection (2025-02-20)

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

Inspection deficiencies

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

ABCDEFGHIJKL

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

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

  • Actual harm · Gcited before2026-04-01 · 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

    1. Based on observation, record review, review of facility policies, and staff and hospice staff interviews, the facility failed to provide the necessary care and services to attain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for 1 of 1 supplemental resident (Resident #62) with uncontrolled pain under hospice care. Failure of staff to effectively assess and treat Resident #62's pain resulted in unnecessary pain and discomfort. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Hospice occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 03/18/24, stated, . The facility retains primary responsibility for implementing aspects of care . Review of the facility policy titled Pain management occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 02/18/26, stated, . Pain management is an interdisciplinary care process that includes . Assessing the potential for pain . Effectively recognizing the presence of pain . Identifying the characteristics of pain . Reports of pain are handled as high priority and handled as such. During an interview on 03/11/26 at 3:45 p.m., Resident #62's family…

    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 · F2026-04-01 · tag F0550 — failed to protect resident dignity and rights — widespread
    Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of facility policies, confidential resident interviews, family, visitor and staff interview, the facility failed to provide necessary care in a manner that promotes, maintains, or enhances their quality of life for 16 of 35 sampled residents (Resident #67, A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, L, M, N, O, P, and Q) requiring assistance with activities of daily living. Failure to assist dependent residents with toileting, answer call lights timely, and speak to residents in a dignified manner does not enhance the resident's quality of life and has the potential to affect the resident's psychosocial and personal dignity. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Resident dignity, choices and preferences occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 11/20/25, stated, . It is the expectation that all . employees will treat residents with dignity and respect at all times. Residents will be encouraged to voice their concerns and needs at all times to ensure their care needs, choices and preferences are honored. Review of the facility policy titled…

    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 · E2026-04-01 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — pattern
    Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.
    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, record review, review of facility policy, and family and staff interview, the facility failed to review and revise care plans to reflect the residents' current status for 5 of 20 sampled residents (Residents #5, #11, #27, #38, and #58) care plans reviewed. Failure to update care plans limited the staff's ability to communicate needs and ensure continuity of care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care plan and baseline care plan occurred on 03/11/26. This policy, dated 02/18/26, stated, . Care plans are update with MDS [Minimum Data Set]/care conference schedule and as needed to assure that they are an accurate reflection of the resident and their care needs. - Review of Resident #5's medical record occurred on all days of survey. Physician's orders included spironolactone (a diuretic) once a day for chronic combined systolic and diastolic heart failure. A quarterly MDS, dated [DATE], identified diuretics as a high-risk drug/medication. The care plan lacked a problem,…

    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 before2026-04-01 · 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 record review, review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual (Version 1.20.1), and resident and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate coding of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 34 sampled residents (Resident #6 and #64). Failure to accurately complete the MDS does not allow each resident's assessment to reflect their current status and may affect the accurate development of a comprehensive care plan and the care provided to the residents.Findings include:SECTION I: ACTIVE DIAGNOSESThe Long-Term Care Facility RAI User's Manual, revised October 2025, pages I-9 and I-12, stated, . Active Diagnoses . Coding Instructions: Code diseases that have a documented diagnosis in the last 60 days and have a direct relationship to the resident's current functional status . mood or behavior status, medical treatments, nursing monitoring. during the 7-day look-back period . Psychiatric/Mood Disorder . I6100, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) . -…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2026-04-01 · 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

    Based on record review, review of facility policy, and resident and staff interviews, the facility failed to provide appropriate toileting for 2 of 6 sampled residents (Resident #4 and #67) who required staff assistance with toileting. Failure to provide toileting may result in a loss of dignity and placed the resident at risk for skin breakdown, decreased self-esteem, urinary tract infections, and falls and/or injuries. Findings include:Review of the facility policy titled Nursing assistant standard care occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 02/18/26, stated, . Assist with toileting needs per resident request. Refer to care plan for individualized toileting needs.- Review of Resident #67's medical record occurred on all days of survey. Diagnosis included fecal urgency. The current care plan stated, . COGNITION-strength: [Resident #67's name] does not have any cognitive diagnoses. He is alert and oriented and is able to make needs known to staff. TOILETING: Staff to provide assist x2 [assistance of two staff] with toileting. Per resident he has no control of bowels. Offer…

    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 · D2026-04-01 · tag F0761 — failed to label and store drugs safely — isolated
    Ensure drugs and biologicals used in the facility are labeled in accordance with currently accepted professional principles; and all drugs and biologicals must be stored in locked compartments, separately locked, compartments for controlled drugs.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, review of professional reference, and staff interview, the facility failed to label medications in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 1 sampled resident (#46) observed for eye drop administration. Failure to ensure appropriate labeling of medications placed resident(s) at risk for medication errors.Findings include: Kozier & Erb's Fundamentals of Nursing, Concepts, Process and Practice, 11th Edition eText, 2021, Pearson, Boston, Massachusetts, page 834, stated, . administer the drug. Read the MAR [medication administration record] carefully and perform three checks with the labeled medications. Box 35.5 Check Three Times for Safe Medication Administration . First Check . Read the MAR and remove the medication(s) from the client's drawer. Verify that the client's name and room number match the MAR. Compare the label of the medication against the MAR. Second Check While preparing the medication . look at the medication label and check against the MAR. Third Check Recheck the label on the container . against the MAR .Observation on 03/11/26 at 1:03…

    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 before2026-04-01 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — isolated
    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, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to maintain a clean and sanitary kitchen environment for 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to ensure cleanliness of the ventilation system above the grill and removal of ice buildup in the walk-in freezer has the potential for contamination of food and may result in a foodborne illness. Findings Include: Review of the facility policy titled Food service areas shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary manner occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 01/09/26, stated . Kitchen . surfaces not in contact with food shall be cleaned . enough to prevent the accumulation of grime.The initial observation of the kitchen, occurred on 03/09/26 at 12:35 p.m. with two dietary supervisors (#18 and #19) and showed the following: * An accumulation of grease and grime on the ventilation system above the grill. * An accumulation of ice/condensation on the ceiling above and beside the fan of the walk-in freezer and an accumulation of ice on boxes of food under the fan.During interviews on the afternoon of 03/09/26 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.

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2026-04-01 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow standards of infection control and prevention for 2 of 8 sampled residents (Resident #64 and #86) observed during cares. Failure to practice infection control standards related to enhanced barrier precautions (EBP), catheters, glove use, and hand hygiene has the potential to spread infection throughout the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Transmission-based precautions, enhanced barrier precautions and empiric precautions occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 09/29/25, stated, . Residents with an indwelling medical device, even if the resident is not known to be infected or colonized with an MDRO [multi-drug resistant organism] . Examples of high contact resident care activities requiring gown and glove use for enhanced barrier precautions include . Device care . urinary catheter . Review of the facility policy titled Hand Hygiene occurred on 03/12/26. This policy, dated 07/02/25, stated, . Hand washing/sanitizing is necessary . 1.…

    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 before2025-02-20 · 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, review of facility policy, review of professional reference, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food is prepared in accordance with professional standards for food service sanitation in 1 of 1 kitchen. Failure to prepare food in a sanitary manner, such as not wearing beard restraints, may result in contamination of food served to residents, staff, and visitors. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled; Food and Nutrition Services occurred on 02/20/25. This policy, revised 01/12/24 stated, . Hairnets or caps and/or beard restraints must be worn to keep hair from contacting exposed food, clean equipment, utensils and linens. The 2022 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code, Chapter 2, pages 21-22 states, . 2-402 Hair restraints . (A) . FOOD EMPLOYEES shall wear hair restraints such as . beard restraints . to effectively keep their hair from contacting exposed FOOD; clean EQUIPMENT, UTENSILS, and LINENS; and unwrapped SINGLE-SERVICE and SINGLE-USE ARTICLES. Observation of the kitchen during the initial tour on 02/18/25 at 12:53…

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

    Nutrition and Dietary Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-02-20 · 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 record review, review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual (Version 1.19.1), and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate coding of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 3 of 19 sampled residents (Resident #2, #19, and #40). Failure to accurately complete the MDS does not allow each resident's assessment to reflect their current status/needs and may affect the accurate development of a comprehensive care plan and the care provided to the residents. Findings include: The Long-Term Care Facility RAI User's Manual, revised October 2024, pages N-6 to N-8, stated, . Code all high-risk drug class medications according to their pharmacological classification . N0415: High-Risk Drug Classes: Use and Indication . N0415C1. Antidepressant: Check if an antidepressant medication was taken by the resident at any time during the 7-day look-back period . N0415E1. Anticoagulant: Check if an anticoagulant medication was taken by the resident at any time during the…

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

    Resident Assessment and Care Planning Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-20 · tag F0554 — isolated
    Allow residents to self-administer drugs if determined clinically appropriate.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to assess a resident for self-administration of medications for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #29) observed with medications at bedside. Failure to evaluate the resident's ability to safely self-administer medications may result in medication errors and/or harm to the resident. Findings include: Review of the policy titled, Self administration of medication occurred on 12/19/23. This policy, last reviewed February 2023, stated, . Upon admission and PRN [as needed], the licensed nursing staff informs every resident of his/her rights to self-administer medications and explains the self-administration of medication program. If the resident wishes to self-administer medications, complete the applicable observation/assessment in the EHR [electronic health record]. If the nurse determines through this assessment that the resident is able to self-administer medications . Obtain an order from the provider that the resident may self-administer medications. Review of Resident #29's…

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

    Resident Rights Deficiencies · Deficient, Provider has date of correction
  • Potential for harm · D2023-12-20 · tag F0580 — failed to tell family and doctor about changes — isolated
    Immediately tell the resident, the resident's doctor, and a family member of situations (injury/decline/room, etc.) that affect the resident.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY This citation is considered past non-compliance based on review of the corrective action implemented by the facility immediately following the incident. Based on information from the complainant, record review, review of professional reference, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to promptly notify the physician to maintain the resident's highest level of well-being for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #1) transferred to the emergency room (ER) for a change in health status. Failure to notify a provider of a residents change in condition and implement provider orders timely may have resulted in worsening respiratory symptoms and a delay in treatment. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Change in condition occurred on 12/20/23. This policy, revised May 2022, stated, . The nurse will notify the resident's Attending Physician or physician on call when there has been a(an) . significant change in the resident's physical/emotional/mental condition . notifications…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-20 · tag F0684 — failed to provide proper treatment and quality of care — isolated
    Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    This citation is considered past noncompliance based on review of the corrective action implemented by the facility immediately following the incident. Based on information from the complainant, record review, review of professional reference, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide care and services to maintain the resident's highest level of well-being for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #23) transferred to the emergency room (ER) for a change in health status. Failure to implement provider orders timely may have resulted in worsening respiratory symptoms and a delay in treatment. Findings include: Kozier & Erb's Fundamentals of Nursing: Concepts, Process, and Practice, 11th Edition eText, 2021, Pearson, Massachusetts, page 63, stated, .Carrying Out a Physician's Orders. If the order is neither ambiguous nor apparently erroneous, the nurse is responsible for carrying it out. The nurse is considered responsible for notifying the primary care provider of any significant changes in the client's condition, whether the primary care provider…

    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 · Past Non-Compliance
  • Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-12-20 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolated
    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.
    What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing

    Based on observation, record review, review of the facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control practices for 3 of 18 sampled residents (Resident #7, #15, #47) observed during cares. Failure to follow infection control practices related to catheter cares, wound care, and wearing proper personal protective equipment (PPE) has the potential for the transmission of communicable diseases and infections to residents and staff. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Transmission based precautions and enhanced barrier precautions [EBP] occurred on 12/20/23. This policy, revised May 2023 stated, . use enhanced barrier precautions . use enhanced barrier precaution sign . during high contact resident cares requiring gown and glove use . goal is to keep our skin/uniform from touching the resident during high contact activities so that we can avoid potential transfer of organisms to other residents . examples include . urinary catheter care . peri-care . changing briefs or assisting with to toileting . wound care . Review…

    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

“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 CASSIA — 16 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 54.4-1.4 vs chain
Health inspection 2 of 53.7-1.7 vs chain
Staffing 5 of 54.8+0.2 vs chain
Quality measures 4 of 54.3-0.3 vs chain
The other 15 homes this chain runs (chain average 4.4★, per CMS)

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
ELIM CARE INCOrganization5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST100%since 01/29/1986
ANDERSON, PAULIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/24/2021
LEFF, WILLIAMIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/18/2000
NUSS, PATRICKIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/19/2005
TANGEDAHL, GUYIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 05/17/2012
WEBER-DANIELS, NICOLETTEIndividualCORPORATE DIRECTORsince 06/24/2021
DAHL, ROBERTIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/29/1986
KERN, MATTHEWIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 02/28/2019
YOUNGQUIST, KATHRYNIndividualCORPORATE OFFICERsince 01/29/1986
CASSIAOrganizationOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 01/01/2018
MUHONEN, RENEEIndividualOPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROLsince 07/15/2015

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

Follow the money — this home’s finances

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

$10.3M
Net patient revenuemost recent cost report
-11.1%
Operating marginrevenue minus expenses
$1.5M
Related-party expense13% of expenses
Who pays — share of resident-days
Medicaid 40%Medicare 20%Other / private 41%

This home reported $1.5M paid to related parties — landlords or management companies under common ownership — equal to about 13% 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. A reported operating loss is common in this industry and is not by itself a sign of trouble — but paired with large related-party payments it can mean profit is being taken elsewhere in the ownership structure.

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

$473per resident / day
operating cost
$14,369per month
≈ monthly operating cost
$425per 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 ND

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 North Dakota Medicaid page.

Typical monthly cost in North Dakota
$11,528/mo
Nursing home (semi-private)
$12,304/mo
Nursing home (private)
$4,729/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 355129. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2026-04-01, 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