620 Second Avenue, Concordia, KS 66901 · Cloud County · (785) 243-2720
45 certified beds, about 36 residents a day · Non profit - Other · Medicare and Medicaid since 1997
CMS Care Compare ratings, data as of September 1, 2026 · CCN 175422 · See it on Medicare.gov · Compare with other homes
At its most recent standard inspection, on March 26, 2025, inspectors cited 14 health deficiencies (the Kansas average is 9.5, the national average 9.2).
Of 41 health citations since January 2022, 3 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (1 immediate jeopardy).
CMS lists 2 fines totaling $23,596 in the last three years; the largest was $14,918, and the latest is dated December 16, 2024.
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 41 health citations on file.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to provide the services of a full-time certified dietary manager for 39 residents who resided in the facility and received their meals from the kitchen. This placed the residents at risk for inadequate nutrition.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an infection monitoring surveillance plan and Enhanced Barrier Protection (EBP - infection control interventions designed to reduce transmission of resistant organisms which employ targeted gown and glove use during high contact care) as staff wore gown and gloves (PPE - gowns, face shields and/or eyeglasses/goggles, and gloves) in the hallway. This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for exposure to infectious processes.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to remove expired medication from use and failed to date one insulin pen when opened. This deficient practice placed residents who may have received those medications at risk for ineffective medication.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to maintain an environment that promoted the dignity of Resident (R) 34, who had blood sugar testing and insulin administration, and R9, who also had insulin administration in the facility's dining room with other residents, staff, and visitors.0 This deficient practice placed the residents at risk for an undignified experience and embarrassment.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to keep Resident (R) 35 free from verbal abuse during transport in the facility bus. This deficient practice placed R35 at risk for fear or mental anguish.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff reported an allegation of verbal abuse from Resident (R) 35 to the administrator immediately to investigate. This placed R35 at risk for ongoing abuse and or mistreatment.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to thoroughly investigate the allegation of verbal abuse immediately. This placed Resident (R) 35 at risk for ongoing abuse and or mistreatment.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on the record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure that Resident (R) 126's transfer or discharge was documented in the resident's medical record and appropriate information was communicated to the receiving healthcare institution or provider. This placed R126 at risk for delayed treatment at the receiving institution.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide Resident (R) 126 with an appropriate bed hold policy as required. This deficient practice placed the resident at risk of being unable to return to the facility in the same room or bed.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide an appropriate cover or dressing for Resident (R) 11's open pressure ulcer (PU) of her left heel. This deficient practice placed R11 at risk for pain or infection.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 10 had physician-ordered fluid intake, which placed R10 at risk of ongoing urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to ensure Resident (R) 10 had physician-ordered fluid intake, which placed R10 at risk of ongoing dehydration and urinary tract infections.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility's consultant pharmacist failed to notify the director of nursing or R34's physician of the lack of monitoring R34's blood pressure as the physician ordered to monitor the effectiveness of her medication, placing R34 at risk of receiving unnecessary medication.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 39 residents. The sample included 13 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to monitor Resident (R)34's blood pressure as the physician ordered to monitor the effectiveness of her medication. This deficient practice placed R34 at risk of receiving unnecessary medication.
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 38 residents with three residents reviewed for resident's rights. Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to promote Resident (R) 1's right to choose, failed to respect R1's wishes, and failed to treat R1 with dignity and respect. On 12/05/24 at approximately 09:30 PM, R1 sat in his room in his wheelchair. Certified Nurse Aide (CNA) O heard another CNA say R1 did not want to go to bed. CNA M and CNA N went into R1's room and made R1 go to bed despite his protest. R1 became resistant to the transfer from his wheelchair to the bed and started hitting and kicking out at CNA M and CNA N. R1 yelled, No, no, no, no, and Get out of here. CNA O entered R1's room and observed R1 lying on his bed with his arms and legs up in a defensive position. CNA O told CNA M and CNA N they could not force R1 to go to bed. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility identified a census of 36 residents with three residents reviewed for pressure ulcers. Based on record review, observation, and interview, the facility failed to provide Resident (R) 1 with care consistent with professional standards of practice to prevent pressure ulcer development. R1 admitted to the facility on [DATE] without any skin issues to her buttock but had crevices to her bilateral heels from previous pressure ulcers. The facility failed to initiate a turning/repositioning program, cushion for wheelchair, or bilateral heel protectors/offloading to prevent R1 from developing pressure ulcers. On 03/27/23 R1 obtained suspected deep tissue injuries to her left sacrum and bilateral heels. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with one closed record for death, reviewed. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure staff provided cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to Resident (R) 41, who desired resuscitative measures indicated by his full code status (code status determination for residents who wish to receive CPR). On [DATE] at 05:00 PM, Licensed Nurse (LN) G observed R41 with irregular respirations. At 05:10 PM, LN G checked on R41 again and identified R41 had no pulse or respirations. Without considering R41's code status or initiating CPR, LN G placed a call to R41's representative, who did not answer. LN G then called Administrative Nurse E who informed LN G that R41 was a full code and directed LN G to start CPR. At 05:22 PM, LN G activated 911 and then initiated CPR. [...]
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. Based on record review and interview, the facility administration failed to use its resources effectively and efficiently to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental, and psychosocial well-being for the 36 residents who reside in the facility which placed all residents at risk for decreased health and wellbeing.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review and interview, the facility's Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) program failed to provide good faith efforts to identify multiple issues of concern. This placed the residents at risk for decreased quality of care and life.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review and interview, the facility lacked evidence the required committee members attended the Quality Assessment and Assurance (QAA) Committee quarterly meetings. This placed the residents who resided in the facility at risk for decreased quality of care.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to provide a sanitary environment to help prevent the development and transmission of communicable disease and infections when the facility failed to develop a water management plan to minimize the risk for development of Legionella (type of bacteria that can cause serious lung infections) or other waterborne pathogens (agents that cause disease or infection) from entering the facility water system.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide an designated and certified Infection Preventionist (IP) to manage and monitor the facility's Infection Prevention and Control Program (IPCP) for the 36 residents who resided in the facility. This placed the residents at risk for infections and health problems.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on record review and interviews, the facility failed to fully complete comprehensive Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment Section V, Care Area Assessment Summary (CAA) for Resident (R) 7, R23, R3, R28, and R93 to include an analysis and rationale for care planning decisions. This placed these residents at risk for not accurately reflecting each resident's status and needs to develop an individualized comprehensive plan of care.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents with one closed record for death reviewed. Based on record review and interview the facility failed to ensure licensed nurses possessed the knowledge and skills to provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for Resident (R) 41, who desired resuscitative measures indicated by his full code status. This placed the full code status residents at risk for receiving inadequate resuscitative measures.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to assess and record the refrigerator temperatures in the medication room and failed to discard an expired medication in the same refrigerator. This placed the residents who received medications from the refrigerators at risk for receiving less potent or unintended effects from the medications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 resident. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to complete a Significant Change Minimum Data Set (MDS) for Resident (R)25 who had a change in activities of daily living (ADL). This placed the resident at risk for unidentified care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents with two reviewed for accidents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed failed to develop a plan of care with meaningful fall prevention interventions for Resident (R)29 who had two falls. This placed the resident at increased risk for falls and fall-related injury.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to revise Resident (R) 25's care plan for accidents. This placed the resident at risk for injury related to uncommunicated or unmet care needs.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide adequate assistance and safety with transfers for Resident (R) 25 and failed to identify and implement interventions to prevent falls for R29 who had two falls. This placed the residents at risk for future falls and related injury.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to implement a process to acknowledge and respond to the Consultant Pharmacist (CP) recommendation for an appropriate indication for the continued use of an antipsychotic (class of medications used to treat mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality testing) for Resident (R) 25. This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thought) medications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to ensure an appropriate indication, or a documented physician rationale which included the multiple unsuccessful attempts for nonpharmacological symptom management and risk versus benefits for the continued use of an antipsychotic (class of medications used to treat mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality testing) for Resident (R) 25's This deficient practice placed the resident at risk for unnecessary psychotropic (alters mood or thought) medications.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 36 residents. The sample included 15 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview the facility failed to provide mail delivery to resident's in the facility on Saturday's.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility staff failed to store, distribute, and serve food in accordance with professional standards in 1 of 1 facility kitchens when staff touched a trash can lid, touched other objects, and continued to serve residents with the same contaminated gloves, when staff placed three different types of meat in the same container to thaw, and failed to label ice cream with an expiration date. This placed the 29 residents who resided in the facility and received meals from the facility kitchen at risk for acquiring a food borne illness.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents with four reviewed for Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Beneficiary Liability notices. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to provide form CMS 10055, Advanced Beneficiary Notice (ABN), which included the estimated cost for continued services for skilled services to the resident or their representative for the four residents, Resident (R) 24, R82, R83, and R84. This deficient practice placed all four residents at risk for uninformed decisions and unanticipated costs related to skilled services.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to prepare four residents' pureed diets by methods that conserve nutritive value when staff failed to measure ingredients and serving sizes for each residents' plate, placing the residents at risk for nonnutritive food items and inappropriate serving size of each food item.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents with six reviewed for activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on observation, record review, and interview the facility failed to provide Resident (R) 7 with the appropriate fitted shoes, placing him at risk for falling.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for hospitalization. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to provide the resident or resident representative with written information regarding the facility bed hold policy, when Resident (R) 8 was transferred to the hospital. This placed R8 at risk for not being permitted to return and resume residence in the nursing facility.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for nutrition. Based on observation, record review, and interviews the facility failed to implement the Registered Dietician's (RD) recommendations for Resident (R) 13, who had a documented weight loss. On 11/19/21 the RD recommended to increase R13's Med Pass 2.0 (a high calorie nutritional supplement) from 60 milliliters (ml) three times daily to 120 ml three daily in response to a 4.11 percent (%) unintended weight loss in 43 days. The facility failed to implement the recommendation until 01/06/22 at which time R13 had a significant weight loss of 11.47 % in three months.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility's Consultant Pharmacist failed to report to the Director of Nursing, physician, and medical director the failure to identify an inappropriate diagnosis and monitor behaviors for the use of an antipsychotic medication (class of medications used to treat any major mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality testing and other mental emotional conditions) for one of five sampled residents, Resident (R) 22. This placed R22 at risk for adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents, with five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on observation, record review, and interview, the facility failed to identify an inappropriate diagnosis and monitor behaviors for the use of an antipsychotic medication (class of medications used to treat any major mental disorder characterized by a gross impairment in reality testing and other mental emotional conditions) for one of five sampled residents, Resident (R) 22. This placed R22 at risk for adverse side effects.
Inspectors wroteThe facility had a census of 29 residents. The sample included 12 residents with one reviewed for hospice services. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to establish and document routine communication between the hospice provider and facility staff which included a plan of care available to facility staff directing what services, equipment, and medication were provided to Resident (R) 21, placing him at risk for delayed or inadequate cares due to lack of communication and/or collaberation between facility staff and hospice care providers.
42 fire safety citations on file: 15 on March 26, 2025, 11 on July 11, 2023, 16 on January 10, 2022.
| Date | Penalty | Amount or length |
|---|---|---|
| December 16, 2024 | Fine | $8,678 |
| October 19, 2023 | Fine | $14,918 |
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) | not reported | 4.07 | 3.86 |
| Registered nurses | not reported | 0.71 | 0.69 |
| All nursing staff on weekends | not reported | 3.60 | 3.42 |
| Nurse aides | not reported | ||
| Licensed practical nurses | not reported | ||
| Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year) | not reported | 48.1% | 45.8% |
| Registered nurse turnover | not reported | 42.0% | 42.9% |
| Administrators who left | not reported |
CMS note on this home's staffing data: This facility did not submit staffing data.
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 | 20.7 | 17.9 | 13.9 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.6 | 2.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.7 | 4.3 | 3.2 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 1.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 20.2 | 16.2 | 14.1 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 1.3 | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1 | 3.2 | 18.1 | 15.4 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 29.2 | 22.4 | 23.8 |
| Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 46.1 | 11.5 | 12.0 |
| Number of hospitalizations per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 1.3 | 1.8 | 1.9 |
| Number of outpatient emergency department visits per 1000 long-stay resident days Long Stay residents, 20250101-20251231 | 3.9 | 2.1 | 1.8 |
For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for Sunset Home Inc's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (38.4% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.
38.4% 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. 38 eligible stays.
11.5% 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. 54 eligible stays.
8.5% this home
No different from the national rate
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. 36 eligible stays.
53.1% 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. 32 residents counted.
0.0% 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. 46 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. 46 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. 16 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: SUNSET HOME, INC..
| Name | Role | Type | Share | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryser, Caitlan | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 12/01/2015 | |
| Shore, Teresa | W-2 managing employee | Individual | 03/21/2016 | |
| Freeborn, Joann | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Hayden, Jarold | Corporate director | Individual | 09/03/2003 | |
| Johnson, Eric | Corporate director | Individual | 02/27/2015 | |
| Worthen, Gregory | Corporate director | Individual | 01/01/2022 | |
| Shore, Teresa | Operational/managerial control | Individual | 03/21/2016 |
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.