South DakotaNew Underwood

Good Samaritan Society New Underwood

412 South Madison, New Underwood, SD 57761 · Pennington County · 41 certified beds · avg 37 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1997

Part of chain: GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY (92 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
2
Serious findings on record
$26,595
Fines, last 3 years
3.41
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

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 · Jun 10, 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Corrected: Jun 30, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jan 30, 2025 · 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: Feb 27, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (29)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Dec 8, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Dec 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not honor residents' right to form and take part in resident or family groups, such as a resident council.
Dec 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Dec 8, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day.
Dec 8, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them.
Jul 9, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 10, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Jan 30, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist.
Jan 30, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Jan 30, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area.
Nov 16, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records.
Nov 16, 2023F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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.
Nov 16, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow.
Nov 16, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (12 → 10).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202350F
2025242G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $26,595.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jun 10, 2025Fine$11,190
Jan 30, 2025Fine$15,405

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

MeasureThis facilitySouth Dakota avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)3.414.323.95bottom 14% in South Dakota; bottom 32% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.950.910.69top 41% in South Dakota; top 18% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.703.713.50bottom 7% in South Dakota; bottom 16% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.370.510.48bottom 31% in South Dakota; bottom 47% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)64.748.245.8bottom 12% in South Dakota; bottom 10% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)50.034.742.9bottom 24% in South Dakota; bottom 39% 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 2.82, RN 0.79, weekend 2.23. Staffing rating: 3/5.

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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
SanfordOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/01/2019
The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan SocietyOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%01/01/2019
Cain, JamesIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Diamond, KennethIndividualContracted Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE08/01/2021
Dykhouse, DanaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Engbrecht, WesleyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Fluit, JoelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Gassen, WilliamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Gassen, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Gulsvig, NeilIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Herseth Sandlin, StephanieIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Hubbeling, PaulIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE08/23/2023
Lundeen, MarkIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Middleton, AimeeIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/27/2022
Molbert, LaurisIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Morrison, TonyIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2019
North, AndrewIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Olson, NicholasIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE04/08/2024
Rogers, MichaelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE06/13/2022
Schema, NathanIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2022

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Westhills Village Health Care Facility19.6 miRapid City, SD★★★★★4/5
Avantara North19.9 miRapid City, SD★★★☆☆3/5
Avantara Saint Cloud19.9 miRapid City, SD★☆☆☆☆2/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in New Underwood →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 435104.