South Dakota ›Sioux Falls

Avera Prince of Peace

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

4513 South Prince of Peace Place, Sioux Falls, SD 57103 (opens Google Maps) · Minnehaha County · (605) 322-5600· 126 certified beds · avg 121 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 1992 · 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 →

Part of chain: AVERA HEALTH (13 facilities, chain avg rating 3.7★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Aug 21, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Jul 3, 2025
$8,278
Fines, last 3 years
5.89
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 3, 2025 · 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: Aug 5, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 17 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint F-0627

  2. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint F-0628

  3. 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

View all 17 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Nov 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make sure a transfer or discharge met the resident's needs and preferences, or did not properly prepare the resident to leave safely. · from a complaint · F-0627
Nov 6, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · from a complaint · F-0628
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council. · F-0565
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0600
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · F-0761
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 21, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function. · F-0605
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Aug 21, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time. · F-0759
Jul 3, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 3, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
Mar 14, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0657
Mar 14, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 30, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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 30, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 9).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 13
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202320E
202420E
2025131G ▲

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 →

1 fine totaling $8,278.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jul 2, 2025Fine$8,278

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)
This facility: 5.89
South Dakota average: 4.32
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.51
South Dakota average: 0.91
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.46
South Dakota average: 3.71
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilitySouth Dakota avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.894.323.95top 6% in South Dakota; top 5% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.510.910.69top 3% in South Dakota; top 5% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.463.713.50top 4% in South Dakota; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)1.090.510.48top 2% in South Dakota; top 5% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)25.048.245.8top 1% in South Dakota; top 7% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)11.134.742.9top 6% in South Dakota; top 4% 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 5.74, RN 1.47, weekend 5.32.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.74 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 4/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Avera Prince of Peace. 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 →

Non profit - Church related

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Avera HealthOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%06/15/1992
Abourezk, SanaaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Avera HealthOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Avera HealthOrganizationTrustee of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2000
Avera HealthOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/18/2025
Berry, PatrickIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/25/2025
Berry, PatrickIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/18/2025
Boschee, RyanIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2024
Bunkers, JenniferIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2021
Chrystal, CandyceIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2023
Costello, JosephIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2017
Curran, MaryIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2015
Dover, JamesIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/23/2023
Fishback, VanIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2018
Gordon, JeffreyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2023
Hill Jensen, CristinaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2018
Kallemeyn, BrendaIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2023
Kirby, JenniferIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2020
Knecht, RandyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2018
Knutson, LaurieIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2017

Showing 20 of 32 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 12 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Avera Health — 13 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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 12 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?"
  • "Before a resident is discharged or transferred, how do you make sure the new place can actually meet their needs?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Does your facility have an active resident council, and how does management respond to its concerns?"
  • "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
  • "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 25% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 32 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Avantara Norton2.6 miSioux Falls, SD—/5abuseSFF
Good Samaritan Society Luther Manor3.1 miSioux Falls, SD★★☆☆☆2/5
Bethany Home Sioux Falls3.9 miSioux Falls, SD★★★☆☆4/5
Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls Center4.3 miSioux Falls, SD★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Dow Rummel Village5.0 miSioux Falls, SD★★★☆☆2/5
Good Samaritan Society Sioux Falls Village5.3 miSioux Falls, SD★★☆☆☆2/5
Bethany Home - Brandon9.3 miBrandon, SD★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Good Samaritan Society Canton14.3 miCanton, SD★★☆☆☆3/5
Tuff Memorial Home16.7 miHills, MN★★★★☆5/5
Palisade Healthcare Center17.5 miGarretson, SD★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Fellowship Village18.7 miInwood, IA★★★★☆4/5

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.

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 435066.

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details