Good Samaritan - Decatur County
108 E Ash Street, Oberlin, KS 67749 · Decatur County · 45 certified beds · avg 19 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1996 · 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: GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY (92 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 28, 2024 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
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.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Mar 15, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 11, 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 (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Oct 1, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jul 14, 2022 · F-0686
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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Aug 6, 2022 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (32)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 17, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Nov 17, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Nov 17, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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). |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| Nov 17, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Apr 28, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 28, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Apr 28, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Apr 28, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · from a complaint |
| Feb 28, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Dec 11, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Nov 30, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not employ enough qualified food and nutrition staff, including a qualified dietician, to properly run its food service. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Nov 30, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Sep 11, 2023 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jul 14, 2022 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. |
| Jul 14, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (8 → 7).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2024 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 11 | 0 | F |
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)
1 fine totaling $20,207.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2023 | Fine | $20,207 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Kansas avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.53 | 4.58 | 3.95 | top 18% in Kansas; top 7% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 2.20 | 0.81 | 0.69 | top 1% in Kansas; top 1% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.60 | 4.05 | 3.50 | top 26% in Kansas; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.99 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 4% in Kansas; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 60.9 | 48.1 | 45.8 | bottom 19% in Kansas; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 83.3 | 42.0 | 42.9 | bottom 8% in Kansas; bottom 4% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 4.35, RN 1.73, weekend 3.62. Staffing rating: 4/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanford | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2019 |
| Bartruff, Craig | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2018 |
| Bartruff, Craig | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/13/2018 |
| Brown, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Dykhouse, Dana | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Engbrecht, Wesley | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Fluit, Joel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Gassen, William | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Gassen, William | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Gulsvig, Neil | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Klinedinst, Tami | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2023 |
| Klinedinst, Tami | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/15/2023 |
| Lundeen, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| McCausland, Maureen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Middleton, Aimee | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/27/2022 |
| Molbert, Lauris | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Morrison, Tony | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
| Morrison, Tony | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2019 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "What is your nurse and aide staffing ratio on each shift, including nights and weekends?"
- "How does your pharmacist review residents' medications, and how quickly can you fill new or urgent prescriptions?"
- "Do you have a qualified dietician on staff, and how involved are they in each resident's nutrition plan?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "How do you help residents maintain their daily living skills, and how do you measure whether it's working?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hillcrest Nursing Home | 26.6 mi | McCook, NE | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Good Samaritan - Atwood | 27.1 mi | Atwood, KS | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Andbe Home, INC | 33.9 mi | Norton, KS | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Sheridan County Hospital LTCU | 38.0 mi | Hoxie, KS | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 175356.