Hatton Prairie Village
950 Dakota Ave, Hatton, ND 58240 · Non profit - Corporation · 38 certified beds · (701) 543-3102 Medicare & Medicaid certified
On the public record, this home looks stronger than most — but visit before you decide.
- a strong health-inspection score (4/5) — the hardest rating to game (though it’s ranked within its own state, not nationally)
- no harm-level citations in the current inspection record
- no federal fines or payment denials on record
- a high payroll-based staffing rating (5/5)
- lower-than-typical staff turnover (26% vs 45% nationally) — better care continuity
- fewer deficiencies at its most recent standard inspection than at the one before — a sign of improvement
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.
| Health inspectionSurveyor-assigned, ranked within your stateInspector-verified | 4 of 5 |
| StaffingFrom payroll records (PBJ) | 5 of 5 |
| Quality measuresSelf-reported by the facility | 5 of 5 |
Location & what’s nearby
Open in Google Maps ↗ · Directions ↗ · Larger map ↗
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 | 5 of 5 |
| Long-stay residentspeople who live here | 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 improved from 4 to 5 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.
See all quality measures vs. state & national benchmarks
| Measure | This home | State avg | Typical state | vs typical state |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities increased | 12.5% | 19.8% | 15.4% | better |
| Long-stay residents who lose too much weight | 5.6% | 5.8% | 5.4% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with a catheter left in their bladder | 3.2% | 1.6% | 0.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection | 1.5% | 2.6% | 2.0% | better |
| Long-stay residents with depressive symptoms | 6.8% | 4.4% | 6.5% | typical |
| Long-stay residents who were physically restrained | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.1% | better than state‡ — see note marked double-dagger below the table |
| Long-stay residents with falls causing major injury | 0.7% | 5.1% | 3.3% | better |
| Long-stay residents whose ability to walk worsened | 16.7% | 17.6% | 16.1% | typical |
| Long-stay residents on antianxiety or hypnotic medication | 21.1% | 17.4% | 18.9% | worse |
| Long-stay residents given the seasonal flu vaccine | 100.0% | 98.8% | 95.3% | typical |
| Long-stay residents with pressure ulcers | 0.0% | 4.9% | 4.7% | check this* — see note marked star below the table |
| Long-stay residents with worsening bladder/bowel control | 30.6% | 24.9% | 21.2% | worse |
| Long-stay residents who got an antipsychotic medication§ — see the note below the table | 9.8% | 22.7% | 17.1% | better |
| Short-stay residents who newly got an antipsychotic medication | 0.0% | 1.5% | 1.4% | better |
| Long-stay hospitalizations per 1,000 resident days | 0.33 | 1.49 | 1.67 | better |
| Long-stay outpatient ER visits per 1,000 resident days | 0.31 | 1.86 | 1.80 | 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.
Therapy staffing: this home’s payroll records show 0.03 therapist hours per resident per day in 2026Q1 — more than 1% of the 13,892 homes that report any therapy hours at all.
Weekend therapy: weekend therapy hours are 0% of this home’s weekday level — it runs therapy on weekdays, with essentially none at the weekend. The median home that reports therapy runs 13% — weekday-focused therapy is the industry norm, not a shortfall. But recovery does not pause on a Saturday: ask what the weekend actually looks like here.
This section is about rehab stays, not living here. Most of this page — the stars, the quality measures, the inspection record — describes the home the way a permanent resident experiences it. These figures describe the short Medicare stay after a hospital discharge: a hip, a stroke, a bad infection, six weeks and home. They are different residents, different staff, often a different wing. Therapy hours are per resident in the building, not per rehab patient — the count includes every long-stay resident, and they mostly get no therapy at all. So a home with a small rehab wing inside a large nursing population reads low here even if its rehab patients get plenty of therapy, and a mostly-rehab home reads high. Use it to compare homes doing similar work, ask what a rehab resident actually gets in a day, and remember that CMS does not publish therapy minutes per patient — nobody does.
See every short-stay measure CMS publishes for this home
| Measure | This home | U.S. median | Period covered | CMS’s call |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Got home and stayed homeRate of successful return to home or community from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Went back to hospitalRate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Met the expected recoveryPercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Self-care at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Moving around at dischargePercentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to move around at discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication problems followed upPercentage of residents whose medications were reviewed and who received follow-up care when medication issues were identified | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medication list to the next providerPercentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the next health care setting | not reported — Newly certified nursing home with less than 12-15 months of data available or the nursing home opened less than 6 months ago, and there were no data to submit or claims 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 discharge | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Falls with major injuryPercentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| New or worsened pressure ulcersPercentage of residents with pressure ulcers/pressure injuries that are new or worsened | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Infections that led to hospitalPercentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
| Medicare spending per stayMedicare Spending Per Beneficiary (MSPB) for residents in SNFs | not reported — The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure. | — | ||
From the CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program — Medicare short-stay outcomes, which is a different dataset from the long-stay quality measures above and describes a different set of residents. Where CMS risk-adjusts a measure we show its adjusted rate, and the CMS range beside it is the confidence interval CMS publishes: a home whose range is wide is a home with few stays, where one patient moves the number several points. Read the period column. These measures do not share a window — the claims-based ones (getting home, readmission, spending) lag by a year or more, because a stay has to finish and its claims settle before it can be counted. CMS’s call is CMS’s, not ours: it is the only place anyone tests whether this home differs from the national rate at all, and most homes on most measures do not. Two caveats on it. CMS tests only three of these measures — getting home, readmission, and infections that led to hospital; on the other nine it publishes a rate and no comparison, and rather than compute a verdict CMS declined to make, we say so in the column. And on readmission almost every home in the country lands on “no different”, so that row separates homes far less than getting-home does — which is why met the expected recovery, a measure CMS does not test but which spreads across the whole range, is called out above the table rather than left in this list. The U.S. median column is our own, taken across every home CMS publishes that measure for in this same file; it is not a CMS-published benchmark. Homes CMS gives no rate for are left out of it rather than counted as zero. Medicare spending per stay is a ratio, not a percentage — 1.00 means this home’s Medicare spending for a stay matched the national figure CMS compares it against, and it measures cost to Medicare, not quality of care.
Staffing
How full it usually is: this home is certified for 38 beds and averages 36.2 residents a day — about 95% occupied, or roughly 2 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 3.97 hrs/resident/day is at or above the 3.48-hour benchmark and RN staffing of 0.87 is at or above the 0.55-hour RN benchmark and nurse-aide staffing of 2.81 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 3.44 hrs/resident/day on weekends vs 4.19 on weekdays — 18% thinner on weekends. RN hours go from 1.02 to 0.50 per resident-day. (Payroll-based daily records; the national median home is 15% thinner on weekends.)
This home’s total nursing-staff turnover of 26% 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
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.
Each letter is a CMS scope-severity level; highlighted ones are where this home has citations. A–C = no harm found; D–F = potential for harm; G–I = actual harm; J–L = immediate jeopardy. Within each band the later letter is the more widespread finding (an isolated G is one resident; a widespread I is a pattern), so rightward and downward is worse.
13 citations, most serious first — scroll within the box to see all.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-24 · tag F0578 — failed to honor advance directives / code status — isolatedHonor 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 record review and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure the residents' right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment for 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident #29) reviewed for advance directives. Failure to ensure the medical record accurately reflected each resident's code status limited the facility's ability to communicate to direct care staff and emergency personnel the residents' choice in the event of a medical emergency.Findings include:Review of Residents #29's medical record occurred all days of survey. The quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS), dated [DATE], identified intact cognition.A physician's order signed on 05/21/25 stated code level I (All available reasonable technology will be used in the event of cardiac or respiratory arrest). The resident's demographic face sheet and code status form, signed by the resident and facility representative on 08/27/25 showed Code Status: DNR [do not resuscitate]/DNI [do not intubate]. The medical record lacked the current code status 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-24 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of facility policy, review of professional reference, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow professional standards of practice for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #6) reviewed for unnecessary medications. Failure to correctly transcribe physician orders placed residents at risk for medication errors and adverse health events. Findings include:Kozier & Erb's Fundamentals of Nursing, Concepts, Process and Practice, 11th Edition eText, 2021, Pearson, Boston, Massachusetts, page 63, stated, Nurses are expected to analyze procedures and medications ordered by the physician or primary care provider. It is the nurse's responsibility to seek clarification of ambiguous or seemingly erroneous orders from the prescriber. Clarification from any other source is unacceptable and regarded as a departure from competent nursing practice.Review of the facility policy titled Physician Signature occurred on 09/24/25. This policy, dated June 2024, stated, . To establish a consistent process for obtaining physician signatures on all required clinical 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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2025-09-24 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, review of facility policy, and staff interview the facility failed to follow standards of infection control for 1 of 2 sampled residents (Resident #12) observed during a dressing change. Failure to follow infection control practices during wound care has the potential to spread infection throughout the facility.Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Dressing Change (Clean) occurred on 09/24/25. This policy, dated June 2024, stated, . Perform hand hygiene . Create clean field with paper towels or towelette dressing . Open dressing pack. Put on first pair of disposable gloves. Remove soiled dressing and discard . Dispose of gloves . Put on second pair of disposable gloves . Cleanse wound . Apply dressings . Review of Resident #12's medical record occurred on all days of survey. The current care plan stated, . Resident has a pressure ulcer present upon admission . Monitor pressure ulcer daily, change dressing daily. A current physician's order stated, Change Mepilex [an absorbent foam dressing] to coccyx [tailbone] daily and PRN [as needed]…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2025-09-24 · tag F0883 — failed to offer flu and pneumonia vaccines — isolatedDevelop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
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 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and recommendations, and staff interview the facility failed to ensure residents were offered the pneumococcal immunization for 1 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #5) reviewed for immunizations. Failure to administer the pneumococcal vaccine to all eligible residents and document the administration has the potential for non-immunized residents to contract pneumonia and spread the infection to other residents, visitors, and staff.Findings include:Review of the CDC: Vaccines and Preventable Diseases webpage (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/pneumo/hcp/recommendations.html), dated October 26, 2024, stated, . CDC recommends pneumococcal vaccination . age [AGE] years or older who have . Not previously received a dose of PCV13, PCV15, PCV20, or PCV21 or whose previous vaccination history is unknown .Review of Resident #5's medical record occurred on all days of survey. A form titled, 2023-2024 Vaccination Season, signed…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-05 · tag F0657 — failed to keep the care plan current — patternDevelop 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
Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to review and revise care plans to reflect residents' current status for 5 of 13 sampled residents (Resident #4, #13, #15, #30 and #32) and 1 supplemental resident (Resident #35). Failure to update care plans limited staffs' ability to communicate needs and ensure continuity of care. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Care Plans and Care Plan Team occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated 10/28/22, stated, . The Care Plan Team will develop and implement a comprehensive care plan for each resident. The care plan includes the following: Resident's doctor's plan of medical care to attain or maintain the resident's highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being . Care plans will be individualized to meet the needs of a resident . Each resident will have care plan meetings when moving into the facility, quarterly, annually and if the resident has a significant change in health. The care plan team will review and revise a resident's care plan at each of these…
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.
- Potential for harm · E2024-09-05 · tag F0812 — failed to store, cook, and serve food safely — patternProcure 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 professional reference, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure food is stored in accordance with professional standards and in a sanitary environment in 1 of 1 kitchen (main kitchen). Failure to ensure food is safe from sources of contamination may result in a foodborne illness or adverse effects for residents, visitors, and staff. Findings include: The 2022 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Food Code, Annex 3-100 stated, . Preventing contamination from the premises . 3-305.11 Food Storage. Pathogens can contaminate and/or grow in food that is not stored properly. Drips of condensate . can be sources of microbial contamination for stored food. Chapter 6-3 Physical Facilities . 6-202.12 Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning System Vents. Heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems shall be designed and installed so that . air intake and exhaust vents do not cause contamination of FOOD, FOOD-CONTACT SURFACES, EQUIPMENT, or UTENSILS. Observation of the kitchen on 09/03/24 at 11:45 a.m. showed the following: - Walk-in Freezer: Two…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0623 — isolatedProvide timely notification to the resident, and if applicable to the resident representative and ombudsman, before transfer or discharge, including appeal rights.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the resident or the resident's representative a written notice of transfer or a copy of the notice to the State Long Term Care Ombudsman for 1of 1 resident (Resident #4) reviewed for hospital transfer. Failure to provide a written copy of the transfer notice does not allow the resident and/or their representative to make an informed decision regarding their rights and does not allow the ombudsman to be aware of facility practices regarding transfer and discharge or advocate on the resident's behalf. Findings include: Review of the facility policy Transfer and Discharge of Resident occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated October 2022, stated, . Notify the resident and resident's representative in writing of the transfer . Give original notice to resident and resident's personal representative by first class mail or personal delivery; . send copies of transfer and discharge notices to the Office of the State Long Term Care Ombudsman . Review of Resident #4's medical record occurred…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0625 — isolatedNotify the resident or the resident’s representative in writing how long the nursing home will hold the resident’s bed in cases of transfer to a hospital or therapeutic leave.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide the resident or resident's representative a written bed hold notice for 1 of 1 resident (Resident #4) reviewed for hospital transfer. Failure to provide a written copy of the bed hold notice and include the reserve bed amount does not allow the resident and/or their representative to make an informed decision regarding their rights. Findings include: Review of the facility policy Holding A Resident's Bed During Absences occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated November 2016, stated, . will inform a resident, legal representative and interested family members of our policy on holding a resident's bed during a resident's absence from our facility. prior to any hospitalization or therapeutic leave, including the amount of the bed-hold charge. Review of Resident #4's medical record occurred on all days of survey. A hospital transfer occurred on 06/17/24. The medical record lacked evidence the facility provided the resident and/or their representative with a written bed hold notice or…
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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0637 — isolatedAssess the resident when there is a significant change in condition
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of the Long-Term Care Facility Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) 3.0 User's Manual (Version 1.18.11), and staff interview, the facility failed to complete a significant change is status assessment (SCSA) for 1 of 1 supplemental resident (Resident #35) who elected hospice services. Failure to complete a SCSA may affect the development of a comprehensive care plan and the care provided to the resident. Findings include: The Long-Term Care Facility RAI User's Manual, revised October 2023, page 2-25 stated, . An SCSA is required to be performed when a terminally ill resident enrolls in a hospice program . The ARD [assessment reference date] must be within 14 days from the effective date of the hospice election. Review of Resident #35's medical record occurred on September 3-4, 2024. A progress note, dated 07/03/24, identified the resident elected hospice services. The facility failed to complete a SCSA when Resident #35 elected hospice services. During an interview on 09/05/24 at 8:30 a.m., an administrative nurse (#7) confirmed the facility failed 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.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0641 — isolatedEnsure 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 1.18.11), and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure accurate coding of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 3 of 13 sampled residents (Resident #4, #12, and #32). 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: SECTION I: ACTIVE DIAGNOSES The Long-Term Care Facility RAI User's Manual, revised October 2023, pages I-7 to I-8, stated, . Code diseases that have a documented diagnosis in the last 60 days and have a direct relationship to the resident's current functional status, cognitive status, mood or behavior status, medical treatments, nursing monitoring, or risk of death during the 7-day look-back period. Review of Resident #12's medical record occurred on all days of survey. The care plan…
This is the beginning of the surveyor’s statement, cut to keep the page readable — the full 2567 continues past this point and often ends with the findings that matter most, such as whether an immediate jeopardy was removed before the surveyors left. The complete statement of deficiencies is a public record: request it from your state survey agency, or ask the home for its 2567 and plan of correction — it must make them available to residents and families.
- Potential for harm · D2024-09-05 · tag F0689 — failed to keep residents free of avoidable accidents; supervise adequately — isolatedEnsure 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 record review, review of facility policy, and staff interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received adequate supervision and/or monitoring for 1 of 1 sampled resident (Resident #28) with an elopement. Failure to identify the resident's risk for elopement and implement, monitor, and modify individualized resident-centered interventions when necessary placed the resident's health and safety at risk when they eloped from the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled MISSING RESIDENT occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated November 2018, stated, . [NAME] Prairie Village assesses residents prior to and upon admission for elopement risk, including all cognitively impaired residents. It also reassesses residents periodically to see if elopement risk is now present, has decreased or increased. Review of Resident #28's medical record occurred on all days of survey and included the diagnoses of dementia and restlessness and agitation. The care plan, dated 07/24/24, stated, .…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2024-09-05 · tag F0880 — failed to prevent and control infections — isolatedProvide 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, facility policy review, and staff interview, the facility failed to follow standards of infection control for 2 of 5 sampled residents (Resident #4, and #12) and 1 supplemental resident (Resident #35) observed during cares. Failure to follow infection control practices during resident cares related to hand hygiene, glove use, and enhanced barrier precautions (EBP), has the potential to spread infection throughout the facility. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled Glove Use occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated June 2024, stated, . Gloves shall be used for touching excretions, secretions, blood, body fluids, mucous membranes, and non-intact skin. Handwashing is necessary even if gloves are worn. Handwashing should be completed after every removal of gloves. Review of the facility policy titled Enhanced Barrier Precautions (EBP) occurred on 09/05/24. This policy, dated April 2024, stated, . staff will use EBP (gowns and gloves) for residents with any of the following: . Indwelling medical devices, . Indwelling medical device…
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.
- Potential for harm · Dcited before2023-10-05 · tag F0658 — failed to meet professional standards of care — isolatedEnsure services provided by the nursing facility meet professional standards of quality.
What the surveyor found here — an excerpt from the official record, may be distressing
Based on record review, review of facility policy, review of professional reference, and staff interview, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with professional standards for 1 of 13 sampled residents (Resident #13) who experienced an unwitnessed fall. Failure to perform neurological assessments and follow up on a blood pressure identified as out-of-range following a fall may result in delayed identification and treatment of a resident's medical condition. Findings include: Review of the facility policy titled NEUROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT occurred on 10/05/23. This undated policy stated, . All residents experiencing an unwitnessed fall will have a neurological assessment completed by a nurse. The neurological assessment will be done every 12 hours x [for] 3 days . Kozier & Erb's Fundamentals of Nursing, Concepts, Process and Practice, 11th Edition eText, 2021, Pearson, Boston, Massachusetts, pages 535-536, stated, . blood pressure . is an important indicator of the client's condition and is used extensively as a basis for nursing interventions. confirm accuracy of 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.
“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.
- 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.
Fines & penalties
No federal fines in the current CMS record.
Who owns this facility
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BEAVER CREEK LUTHERAN CHURCH | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 05/01/2019 |
| BETHANY LUTHERAN CHURCH | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 05/01/2019 |
| GOOSE RIVER LUTHERAN CHURCH | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 05/01/2019 |
| HOLMES UNITED METHODIST CHURCH | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 05/01/2019 |
| ST. JOHN LUTHERAN CHURCH | Organization | 5% OR GREATER DIRECT OWNERSHIP INTEREST | 20% | since 05/01/2019 |
| BJERKE, JOANNA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/01/2020 |
| HEDLAND, LAUREL | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/01/2016 |
| IVERSON, STEVE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/01/2013 |
| REINHART, BETTY | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 01/01/2019 |
| REINHART, LINDA | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 11/01/2018 |
| VOLD, BRUCE | Individual | CORPORATE DIRECTOR | — | since 02/01/2019 |
| TREDWELL, CYNTHIA | Individual | CORPORATE OFFICER; OPERATIONAL/MANAGERIAL CONTROL | — | since 11/01/2006 |
CMS files one row per role, so the 13 rows in the source record cover these 12 parties — each is shown once here with every role it holds. Nothing is omitted.
5 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.
What families pay in ND
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.
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 355051. CMS refreshes its data monthly, and the star rating rests on the last standard inspection — dated 2025-09-24, 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.