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★)
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Feb 11, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 1, 2024
$16,036
Fines, last 3 years
4.46
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
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 · Aug 1, 2024 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
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: Jul 31, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 9, 2024 · 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, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 13 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. · from a complaintF-0812
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 complaintF-0880
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 complaintF-0657
View all 13 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
Jan 30, 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. · from a complaint · F-0812
Jan 30, 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
Jan 30, 2025
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
Jan 30, 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
Aug 1, 2024
▲ 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. · from a complaint · F-0760
May 9, 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
Jan 18, 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. · F-0804
Jan 18, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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
Jan 18, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Jan 18, 2024
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. · F-0689
Jan 18, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0757
Jan 18, 2024
D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated
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. · F-0761
Jan 18, 2024
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
Inspection trend by year
Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations:
9
Serious citations (G–L):
2
2025
All citations:
4
Serious citations (G–L):
0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Year
Citations
Serious (G–L)
Worst severity that year
2024
9
2
G ▲
2025
4
0
E
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.
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
Aug 1, 2024
Fine
$8,018
May 9, 2024
Fine
$8,018
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityNorth Dakota averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility:
4.46
North Dakota average:
5.15
U.S. average:
3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility:
1.07
North Dakota average:
1.09
U.S. average:
0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility:
3.95
North Dakota average:
4.43
U.S. average:
3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
Measure
This facility
North Dakota avg
U.S. avg
Where it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
4.46
5.15
3.95
bottom 21% in North Dakota; top 24% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours
1.07
1.09
0.69
top 46% in North Dakota; top 13% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing
3.95
4.43
3.50
bottom 26% in North Dakota; top 24% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)
0.69
0.59
0.48
top 27% in North Dakota; top 17% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)
22.4
48.8
45.8
top 2% in North Dakota; top 4% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)
0.0
40.3
42.9
top 1% in North Dakota; top 1% 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 4.43, RN 1.06, weekend 3.92.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.43 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.
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Good Samaritan Society Augusta Place a Prospera Co. 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.
Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
11/25/2025
Fluit, Joel
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
10/01/2022
Focusone Solutions
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
03/04/2024
Gassen, William
Individual
Corporate Director
NOT APPLICABLE
05/30/2024
Gassen, William
Individual
Corporate Officer
NOT APPLICABLE
05/30/2024
Gassen, William
Individual
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
05/30/2024
Grape Tree Medical Staffing LLC
Organization
ADP of the SNF
NOT APPLICABLE
04/13/2018
Showing 20 of 56 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 36 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 Good Samaritan Society — 92 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.
Health inspection rating 4/5 · CMS overall 5/5· Fines (3y): $16,036
Most serious findings on record:
▲ Aug 1, 2024 (F-0760, 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.
▲ May 9, 2024 (F-0689, 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.
Questions for the administrator:
☐ "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
☐ "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
☐ "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
☐ "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
☐ "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
☐ "Can you tell me what this citation involved and what steps you took to bring care back up to standard?"
☐ "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
☐ "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
☐ "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the North 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 22% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
☐ "The ownership record on file lists 56 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
☐ "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"
While you're there, notice:
☐ Smell and cleanliness in hallways, not just the lobby
☐ How staff speak to residents; call lights answered promptly
☐ Residents up, dressed, and engaged (visit mealtimes and a weekend if you can)
Data: CMS Provider Data Catalog, version 2026-08-01 · CCN 355125 · Verify at medicare.gov/care-compare · Printed from The Care File (thecarefile.com)