South Dakota ›Sioux Falls

Avantara Norton

Costs & payment Plan a visit

3600 South Norton Avenue, Sioux Falls, SD 57105 (opens Google Maps) · Minnehaha County · (605) 338-9891· 110 certified beds · avg 98 residents/day · certified since Apr 1, 1989 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Abuse citation flag (CMS)SFF

What the abuse flag means → · What Special Focus status means →

Part of chain: LEGACY HEALTHCARE (89 facilities, chain avg rating 2.9★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

—/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Mar 31, 2026

19

Serious findings on record

most recent Mar 31, 2026

$215,483

Fines, last 3 years

3.53

Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: —/5 · CMS overall rating: —/5 · how star ratings work →

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy) — showing 10 of 19

▲ Immediate jeopardy, pattern · Nov 9, 2023 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (K): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Dec 7, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has plan of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2026 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2026 · F-0697

The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.

Why it matters: Untreated pain causes needless suffering and can lead to depression, poor sleep, and declining health.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 31, 2026 · F-0760

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 8, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 4, 2026 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jan 16, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 4, 2026 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 6, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Feb 4, 2026 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Mar 6, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 10, 2025 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: May 1, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 75 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Mar 31, 2026G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint F-0684
Mar 31, 2026G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint F-0686
Mar 31, 2026G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint F-0689

View all 75 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Mar 31, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Mar 31, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Mar 31, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Mar 31, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Mar 31, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · F-0760
Mar 31, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · from a complaint · F-0561
Mar 31, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Mar 31, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Mar 31, 2026	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · from a complaint · F-0688
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. · F-0578
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide necessary behavioral health care and services — support for residents' mental and emotional wellbeing, including conditions like depression and anxiety. · from a complaint · F-0740
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Mar 31, 2026	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Feb 4, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Feb 4, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Feb 4, 2026	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Dec 30, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Dec 30, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804
Nov 14, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint · F-0880
Jul 10, 2025	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jul 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Jul 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Jul 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Apr 10, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Apr 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Apr 10, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not properly prepare residents for a safe transfer or discharge. Before a resident leaves, the facility must get them ready and make sure the move is safe and orderly. · from a complaint · F-0624
Mar 5, 2025	▲ H · Actual harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' individual preferences, choices, values, and beliefs in their daily life and care. · from a complaint · F-0675
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. · F-0582
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · F-0695
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · F-0837
Mar 5, 2025	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Mar 5, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Mar 5, 2025	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Dec 27, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Nov 14, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint · F-0600
Oct 29, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Oct 29, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657
Sep 26, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint · F-0655
Aug 21, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Aug 21, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Aug 21, 2024	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint · F-0804
Jul 17, 2024	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint · F-0812
Jun 20, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Jun 20, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
Apr 16, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Mar 13, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Mar 13, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0697
Mar 13, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint · F-0658
Dec 14, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. · from a complaint · F-0550
Dec 14, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not honor residents' right to voice complaints without discrimination or retaliation, or did not have a working complaint process that resolves issues promptly. · from a complaint · F-0585
Nov 9, 2023	▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689
Nov 9, 2023	▲ H · Actual harm, pattern	The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · F-0686
Nov 9, 2023	▲ H · Actual harm, pattern	The facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · F-0725
Nov 9, 2023	▲ H · Actual harm, pattern	The facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint · F-0726
Nov 9, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. · F-0835
Nov 9, 2023	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	The facility did not have a proper governing body legally responsible for its policies and operations, or that body failed to appoint a properly licensed administrator to manage the facility. · F-0837
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · F-0623
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · from a complaint · F-0657
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems. · F-0756
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not have enough support staff to safely and effectively run its food and nutrition service. · F-0802
Nov 9, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not serve meals and snacks at times that fit residents' needs, preferences, and requests, or did not offer nourishing alternatives for residents who want to eat outside scheduled meal times. · F-0809
Nov 9, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Nov 9, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · F-0658
Nov 9, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Oct 4, 2023	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584
Oct 4, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · from a complaint · F-0677

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 12).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2023

23

4

2024

15

5

2025

19

2

2026

18

8

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Year	Citations	Serious (G–L)	Worst severity that year
2023	23	4	K ▲
2024	15	5	G ▲
2025	19	2	H ▲
2026	18	8	G ▲

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

How to file a complaint about care →

7 fines totaling $215,483.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

Date	Type	Amount / length
Feb 4, 2026	Fine	$61,845
Mar 5, 2025	Fine	$51,376
Sep 26, 2024	Fine	$12,035
Jul 17, 2024	Fine	$12,035
Jun 20, 2024	Fine	$12,035
Mar 13, 2024	Fine	$37,557
Oct 4, 2023	Fine	$28,600

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

This facilitySouth Dakota averageU.S. average

Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)

3.53

4.32

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.70

0.91

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

3.16

3.71

3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

Measure	This facility	South Dakota avg	U.S. avg	Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)	3.53	4.32	3.95	bottom 21% in South Dakota; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours	0.70	0.91	0.69	bottom 33% in South Dakota; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing	3.16	3.71	3.50	bottom 33% in South Dakota; bottom 40% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)	0.45	0.51	0.48	bottom 45% in South Dakota; top 40% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)	55.7	48.2	45.8	bottom 26% in South Dakota; bottom 24% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)	50.0	34.7	42.9	bottom 24% in South Dakota; bottom 39% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.86, RN 0.77, weekend 3.45.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.86 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: —/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

Quality measures rating: —/5 · long-stay residents: —/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Avantara Norton. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
Doros Generation Trust U/A/D 1/3/12	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	43%	10/02/2019
GPN Family Trust U/A/D 4/28/08	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	43%	10/02/2019
Oakway Operations LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest	15%	10/02/2019
Bokf,na	Organization	5% or Greater Security Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	03/04/2024
Bokf,na	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	03/04/2024
Doros Generation Trust U/A/D 1/3/12	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
GPN Family Trust U/A/D 4/28/08	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Legacy Healthcare Financial Services LLC	Organization	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Legacy Healthcare Financial Services LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	11/24/2025
Nickel, Ashley	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	08/28/2022
Nickel, Ashley	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	08/28/2022
Norton SD Property Holdings, LLC	Organization	5% or Greater Security Interest	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Norton SD Property Holdings, LLC	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Rees, Joseph	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Rees, Joseph	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Roth & Co, LLP	Organization	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	01/01/2024
Shabat, Menachem	Individual	Managing Control - Governing Body	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Shabat, Menachem	Individual	Operational/Managerial Control	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019
Shabat, Menachem	Individual	ADP of the SNF	NOT APPLICABLE	10/02/2019

All 19 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Legacy Healthcare — 89 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Avantara Pierre — Pierre, SD · overall 2/5abuse
Avantara Redfield — Redfield, SD · overall 2/5
Avantara Saint Cloud — Rapid City, SD · overall 1/5abuse
Avantara Watertown — Watertown, SD · overall 1/5abuseSFF
Bloomfield Care Center — Bloomfield, IA · overall 3/5
Colonial Manor of Elma — Elma, IA · overall 2/5abuse
Concord Care Center — Garner, IA · overall 5/5
Emmetsburg Care Center — Emmetsburg, IA · overall 1/5

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 88 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

"What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
"How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
"How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
"How do you assess and manage residents' pain, especially for those who have trouble communicating?"
"What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
"How do you learn each resident's personal preferences and make sure staff actually follow them?"
"How do you verify that your nurses and aides have the skills to care for residents with needs like my family member's?"
"Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"

Also worth asking anywhere

"Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the South Dakota midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
"Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
"CMS reports 56% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"The ownership record on file lists 19 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
"CMS lists this facility under its Special Focus program — what is being done differently, and by when?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

Facility	Distance	City	Overall	Inspection	Flags
Good Samaritan Society Luther Manor	0.6 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Bethany Home Sioux Falls	1.4 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★★☆☆	4/5
Avera Prince of Peace	2.6 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★★★☆	3/5
Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls Village	2.8 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★☆☆☆	2/5
Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls Center	3.0 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★☆☆☆	2/5	abuse
Dow Rummel Village	3.3 mi	Sioux Falls, SD	★★★☆☆	2/5
Bethany Home - Brandon	11.0 mi	Brandon, SD	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Good Samaritan Society Canton	15.8 mi	Canton, SD	★★☆☆☆	3/5
Palisade Healthcare Center	18.5 mi	Garretson, SD	★☆☆☆☆	1/5	abuse
Tuff Memorial Home	19.2 mi	Hills, MN	★★★★☆	5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Minnehaha, SD — 10 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Dells Nursing and Rehab Center INC — Dell Rapids, SD · overall 4/5

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Sioux Falls →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 435039.