2160 Zinnia Lane, Liberal, KS 67901 · Seward County · (620) 624-3831
45 certified beds, about 36 residents a day · Non profit - Corporation · Medicare and Medicaid since 1995
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 175334 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on June 24, 2026, inspectors cited 11 health deficiencies (the Kansas average is 9.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 39 health citations since October 2022, 8 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (6 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 4 fines totaling $94,784 in the last three years; the largest was $47,613, and the latest is dated April 22, 2026.
Nurses and nurse aides worked 4.07 hours per resident per day, against 4.07 across Kansas and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 1.36 of those hours.
32.6% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Kansas average 48.1%).
CMS links it to Good Samaritan Society, an affiliated group of 92 nursing homes.
Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.
Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.
CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 39 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to identify and implement measures consistent with and in accordance with professional standards of practice to prevent the development of and promote the healing of pressure ulcers (localized injury to the skin and/or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence, as a result of pressure, or pressure in combination with shear and/or friction) for Resident (R) 9, who developed a facility acquired, unstageable, deep tissue injury to her right heel. The staff failed to monitor skin checks weekly, failed to ensure R9's heels were offloaded, and failed to ensure R9 received the required interventions including a low air loss mattress to prevent pressure ulcer development. Additionally, the facility failed to monitor R1's wound for two weeks.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to prepare and serve food under sanitary conditions to prevent the outbreak of foodborne bacteria.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review, the facility failed to inform Resident (R) 6 and/or their representatives regarding the risks related to psychotropic (alters mood or thoughts) medications.
Inspectors wroteBased on record review and interviews, the facility failed to provide form CMS-10055 Skilled Nursing Facility Advance Beneficiary Notice of Non-coverage Form 10055 (SNF-ABN: used to notify Medicare A participants discharging from services of potential charges) and Notification of Medicare Non-Coverage Form 10123 (NOMNC- the form used to notify Medicare A participants of their rights to appeal and the last covered date of service) to the resident or their representative for Resident (R) 18.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a written bed hold policy at the time for transfer for Resident (R) 5.
Inspectors wroteBased on interview, observation, and record review, the facility failed to provide services to meet professional standards of care when staff failed to ensure Resident (R) 11's Electronic Medication Administration Record (EMAR) was signed off with initials after medications were administered. Additionally, the staff failed to ensure R11 received her medications at the ordered time.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure residents received assistance with activities of daily living (ADL), including facial hair removal for Resident (R) 18 and assistance with nail care for R18, R6, and R11.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to monitor and respond to Resident (R) 25's lack of bowel movements for 13 consecutive days.
Inspectors wroteBased on observations, record review, and interviews, the facility failed to ensure an environment free of chemical hazards for severely cognitively impaired Resident (R) 26 who had a bottle of 91 percent rubbing alcohol on his tray table.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate catheter (a flexible tube inserted through a narrow opening into a body cavity, particularly the bladder, for removing fluid) related care for Resident (R) 18 when staff did not ensure each resident's catheter tubing was secure to prevent pulling or dislodgement. The facility additionally failed to ensure R18 had a diagnosis for the indwelling catheter.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate infection control practices related to urinary catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine) care, hand hygiene, and glove use with intravenous (IV) medication.
Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 1 remained free of accident hazards on 01/17/26 at approximately 07:30 AM, when R1 fell from a mechanical lift and struck his head. R1 sustained two hematomas (a collection of blood trapped in the tissues of the skin or in an organ, resulting from trauma) on the back of his head.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 40 residents, with four residents sampled, including two residents reviewed for accidents related to smoking. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to ensure a safe environment free from accident hazards for all residents in the facility on [DATE] at approximately 01:20 PM when cognitively impaired Resident (R) 1 used a cigarette lighter to start a fire in her room; R1 set fire to her recliner. The facility smoke alarm sounded and Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M and CNA N used the fire extinguisher to put out the fire. All residents were evacuated from the building and Law Enforcement (LE) arrived at the facility and inspected R1's room with Licensed Nurse (LN) G for the source of the fire. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents sampled, which included three residents reviewed for abuse and neglect. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility deprived Resident (R) 7 care when the facility failed to ensure call lights were working appropriately to address the care needs of all residents residing on one of the four halls. On 07/16/24, during initial screening, multiple residents reported issues with call light response times and the surveyor observed a 42-minute call light response time for R 7. The facility reported they had issues with the call light system for months and used staff at the nurses' station to watch the system; however, on 07/17/24 at 07:25 AM, no staff were at the nurses' station watching the call light system. This failure placed the residents in immediate jeopardy. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 sampled for review. The sample included one cognitively intact dependent Resident (R) 17 for reporting an allegation of abuse. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to report an allegation of sexual assault when R17 reported a sexual assault by 2 male perpetrators on 05/16/24. On 05/24/24 the resident went to the hospital for chest pain and reported to hospital staff she was sexually assaulted in the facility. On 05/29/24 the resident readmitted to the facility. The hospital notified the facility of resident's report of sexual assault 05/24/24 and on discharge 5/29/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 sampled for review. The sample included one cognitively intact dependent Resident (R) 17 reviewed for investigating an allegation of abuse related to sexual assault. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate R17's allegations of sexual assault and failed to protect R17 from potential further sexual abuse. The resident reported sexual assault by 2 male perpetrators on 05/16/24. On 05/24/24 the resident went to the hospital for chest pain and reported to hospital staff she was sexually assaulted in the facility. On 05/29/24 the resident readmitted to the facility. The hospital notified the facility of resident's report of sexual assault 05/24/24 and on discharge 5/29/24. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents, with 17 residents sampled, which included four residents reviewed for Trauma Informed Care. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to acknowledge and respond appropriately to R17's allegations of sexual assault and her display of behaviors, which align to a trauma response, based on reasonable person concept, when the resident expressed feelings of fear, anger, and aggressiveness associated with her reported allegation of sexual assault while a resident of the facility. This failure placed R17 in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) and at risk for untreated trauma and the negative impact to her mental, physical, and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner to prevent possible food-borne illness to the residents of the facility.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 37 residents. Based on observations, record reviews, and interviews the facility failed to put in place an effective administration who ensured the facility was administered in a manner that enabled it to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being of each resident who resided at the facility. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for decreased quality of care, quality of treatment, and sense of well-being.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to electronically submit to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) complete and accurate direct care staffing information, including information for agency and contract staff, based on payroll and other verifiable and auditable data in a uniform format according to specifications established by CMS (i.e. Payroll Base Journal [PBJ], related to licensed nursing coverage 24 hours/day and excessively low weekend staffing.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents. Based on the observations, interview, and record review obtained on the current survey and its numerous findings of deficient practice including 4 Immediate Jeopardy citations which constituted Substandard Quality of Care, and with several of the deficient practice areas noted as repeat citations from the prior survey, the facility failed to demonstrate an effective Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) program. This failure affected all 37 residents of the facility and placed them at risk for a decreased quality of life, decreased quality of care, and continued resident abuse. (See all citations associated with (HEJK11). Findings Included: - During the second day of the onsite recertification survey, the surveyors discovered one Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) concerns which were not identified by the facility. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to capture a significant change on Resident (R) 21 when the resident had two areas of decline in activities of daily living and increased behaviors. This deficient practice had the potential to lead negative impacts on the resident's physical, mental and psychosocial well-being.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately complete the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for five sampled residents, Resident (R)7 and R21 related to personal alarm use, R8 related to urinary catheter (tube inserted into the bladder to drain urine into a collection bag), R32 related to antiplatelet medication use and R23 for restraint use. This placed the residents at risk for uncommunicated care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents sampled, which included five residents identified for restorative nursing services (care provided to maintain a person's highest level of physical, mental, and psychosocial function in order to prevent declines that impact quality of life). Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide treatment and services for four of the five sampled residents (R)4, R 11 R 29, and R 8, related to the lack of restorative nursing programs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to accurately update Resident (R)7's care plan for fall interventions. This placed the residents at risk for uncommunicated care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an environment that remained free from accident hazards for two residents when the facility failed to appropriately place a fall mat on the floor next to Resident (R)21's bed. This deficient practice could potentially result in an injury. R36 the facility failed to ensure a safe transfer for R36, when staff utilized a full body mechanical lift, without a second staff member present. This deficient practice could potentially result in a mechanical lift transfer accident.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure two resident's medications received and documented as ordered by the physician. The facility failed to administer scheduled Tramadol to Resident (R)8 for seven days. Furthermore, the facility failed to administer R16's insulin on one day per sliding scale orders.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 37 residents with 17 residents selected for review. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to follow the Consultant Pharmacist recommendation to complete an Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) (a rating scale to measure involuntary movements known as tardive dyskinesia [TD is abnormal condition characterized by involuntary repetitive movements of the muscles of the face, limbs and trunk]) for one of the five residents reviewed for unnecessary medications. Resident (R)21 who received risperidone, an antipsychotic (class of medications used to treat major mental conditions which cause a break from reality).
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 40 residents, with four residents sampled, including three residents reviewed for risk of elopement (an incident in which a cognitively impaired resident with poor or impaired decision- making ability/safety awareness leaves the facility without the knowledge of staff). Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision and a safe environment, as free of accident hazards as possible, to prevent the elopement of cognitively impaired and independently mobile Resident (R)2. The facility staff knew R2 was an elopement risk and R2 had been upset and voiced she wanted to go home. The facility staff then left R 2 unsupervised near the front entrance. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 32 residents and identified nine residents that discharged to the hospital since 09/07/22. The sample of nine, included one resident sampled for hospitalization. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to send a copy of the facility-initiated hospitalization transfer/discharge notice to the representative of the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman for Resident (R) 15's two hospitalizations as well as the other eight residents discharged to the hospital since 09/07/22.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 32 residents and identified nine residents that discharged to the hospital since 09/07/22. The sample of nine, included one resident sampled for hospitalization. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide a copy of the facility bed hold policy to Resident (R) 15 or their representative when they transferred out of the facility to the hospital, as well as the other eight residents or their representatives that discharged to the hospital since 09/07/22.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 32 residents. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure competent nursing staff as evidenced by the lack of required annual evaluation for five direct care staff sampled, Certified Medication Aide (CMA)R, Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) M, CNA Q, CNA N, and CNA O, to identify staff competencies to perform necessary nursing care and services for the residents of the facility.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 32 residents with 12 residents included in the sample. Based on interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the right to include the resident and /or resident representative to participate in the development and implementation of the resident's person-centered plan of care for Resident (R) 131, when they failed to invite the resident/resident representative for the resident's care plan meetings.
Inspectors wroteThe facility reported a census of 32 residents with 12 residents in the sample. Based on interviews and record reviews, the facility failed to notify the family when Resident (R) 131 returned to the facility from a hospital on [DATE], to ensure the resident representative notified of significant changes in the resident's health status.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 32 resident with 12 residents included in the sample. Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to revise Resident (R) 21 care plan to reflect shaving preference.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 32 resident with 12 residents included in the sample. Based on observations, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure personal hygiene had been completed for the Resident (R) 21 related to shaving of facial hair.
Inspectors wroteThe facility census totaled 32 residents with 12 residents in the sample. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to consistently apply a right-hand device to maintain proper functional positioning for Resident (R) 2's hand.
Inspectors wroteThe facility census totaled 32 residents, with 12 residents sampled, including five for unnecessary medications. Based on interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate follow up of the consultant pharmacist recommendations for Resident (R) 15 and R28. Furthermore, the facility failed to ensure each resident was reviewed each month, missing two months for R28. These failures placed the residents at risk for adverse effects related to medication use.
Inspectors wroteThe facility census totaled 32 residents, with 12 residents sampled, including five for unnecessary medications. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring of medications for Resident (R) 15 and R28. These failures placed the residents at risk for adverse effects related to medication use.
30 fire safety citations on file: 6 on June 24, 2026, 20 on July 24, 2024, 4 on October 27, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| April 22, 2026 | Fine | $16,350 |
| May 14, 2025 | Fine | $14,444 |
| July 24, 2024 | Fine | $47,613 |
| March 28, 2024 | Fine | $16,377 |
A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.
Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.
| Measure | This home | Kansas | United States |
|---|---|---|---|
| All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides) | 4.07 | 4.07 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | 1.36 | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | 3.47 | 3.60 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | 2.70 | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | 0.00 | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | 32.6% | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | 9.1% | 42.0% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | 0 |
CMS expects 3.66 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.
Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 4.31 on weekdays and 3.47 on weekends, 19% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 0.0% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.82 in April to June 2025 to 4.07 in January to March 2026.
| Quarter | All nursing staff | Registered nurses | Weekdays | Weekends | Contract staff share | Days with no RN hours | Residents a day |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.07 | 1.36 | 4.31 | 3.47 | 0.0% | 0 of 90 | 36 |
| Oct to Dec 2025 | 3.75 | 1.27 | 3.95 | 3.22 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 39 |
| Jul to Sep 2025 | 3.66 | 1.18 | 3.85 | 3.16 | 0.0% | 0 of 92 | 40 |
| Apr to Jun 2025 | 3.82 | 1.10 | 4.03 | 3.30 | 0.2% | 1 of 91 | 39 |
| United States, Jan to Mar 2026 | 3.75 | 0.62 | 3.92 | 3.33 | 5.3% | 0.5% of days | |
| Kansas, Jan to Mar 2026 | 4.01 | 0.67 | 4.19 | 3.56 | 4.8% | 0.6% of days |
Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.
Staff pay reports
No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.
| Job | Median | Middle half | Employed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kansas, all employers | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $18.27 | $17.41 to $21.24 | 24,610 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $29.69 | $27.05 to $33.40 | 7,530 |
| Registered nurses | $38.14 | $35.24 to $45.53 | 33,800 |
| United States, nursing care facilities | |||
| CNAs (nursing assistants) | $20.67 | $17.91 to $22.55 | 534,270 |
| LPNs and LVNs | $33.86 | $30.05 to $37.40 | 188,210 |
| Registered nurses | $41.11 | $37.85 to $47.68 | 142,270 |
Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.
The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.
| Measure | This home | Kansas | US |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 34.5 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.6 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.0 | 2.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 6.5 | 4.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.5 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 30.3 | 16.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.8 | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 8.9 | 18.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 14.7 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 11.6 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.8 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 2.8 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Good Samaritan-Liberal's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (42.8% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
42.8% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 51.5% · Kansas: 42 better, 17 worse
Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 40 eligible stays.
10.0% this home
No different from the national rate
US median of homes 10.7% · Kansas: 3 better, 0 worse
Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 58 eligible stays.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
US median of homes 7.1% · Kansas: 3 better, 0 worse
Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 22 eligible stays.
35.7% this home
Median of homes: Kansas55.7% · US 56.6%
Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 28 residents counted.
6.3% this home
Median of homes: Kansas0.0% · US 0.0%
Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 32 residents counted.
0.0% this home
Median of homes: Kansas2.1% · US 1.7%
Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 32 residents counted.
Not reported
CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.
Median of homes: Kansas99.3% · US 98.7%
Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 8 residents counted.
Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.
Legal business name: THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY. CMS links this home to Good Samaritan Society, a group of 92 nursing homes averaging 3.1 stars overall.
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanford | 5% or greater direct ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society | 5% or greater indirect ownership interest | Organization | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| Brown, George | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Dykhouse, Dana | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Engbrecht, Wesley | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Gassen, William | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Gulsvig, Neil | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Lundeen, Mark | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| McCausland, Maureen | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Molbert, Lauris | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| North, Andrew | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Schieffer, Kevin | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Shulkin, David | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Teiken, Brent | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Ventling-Herrmann, Marnie | Corporate director | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Wenzel, Thomas | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Fluit, Joel | Corporate officer | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Gassen, William | Corporate officer | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Middleton, Aimee | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/27/2022 | |
| Olson, Nicholas | Corporate officer | Individual | 04/08/2024 | |
| Schema, Nathan | Corporate officer | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Baker, Valerie | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 12/04/2024 | |
| McCue, Tamara | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Morrison, Tony | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 01/01/2019 | |
| Sandgren, Deeandra | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 07/16/2023 | |
| Dtn Staffing Inc | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 08/02/2024 | |
| Focusone Solutions | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 03/04/2024 | |
| Grape Tree Medical Staffing LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 04/13/2018 | |
| Omnicare LLC | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2025 | |
| Sanford | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 12/04/2025 | |
| The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society | Adp of the SNF | Organization | 01/01/2019 | |
| Baker, Valerie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 12/04/2024 | |
| Brown, George | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Dykhouse, Dana | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Engbrecht, Wesley | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Fluit, Joel | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 10/01/2022 | |
| Gassen, William | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Gulsvig, Neil | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Lundeen, Mark | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| McCausland, Maureen | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| McCue, Tamara | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/01/2024 | |
| Middleton, Aimee | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/27/2022 | |
| Molbert, Lauris | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Morrison, Tony | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2019 | |
| North, Andrew | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Olson, Nicholas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 04/08/2024 | |
| Sandgren, Deeandra | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 07/16/2023 | |
| Schema, Nathan | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Schieffer, Kevin | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 | |
| Shulkin, David | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Teiken, Brent | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Ventling-Herrmann, Marnie | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 05/30/2024 | |
| Wenzel, Thomas | Adp of the SNF | Individual | 01/01/2025 |
As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.
Chosen from this home's own inspection record.