Good Samaritan Society - Windom
705 Sixth Street, Windom, MN 56101 · Cottonwood County · 63 certified beds · avg 55 residents/day · certified since May 1, 1991
Part of chain: GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY (92 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)
1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$194,680
Fines, last 3 years
4.87
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, repeated · Jan 27, 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 (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Feb 25, 2026 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (35)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 12, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility's quality committee — the internal group responsible for finding and fixing care problems — did not have the required members or did not meet at least every three months. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Feb 12, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. · from a complaint |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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). |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | 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. |
| Feb 12, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jan 27, 2026 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | 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 |
| Jan 27, 2026 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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 |
| Jan 27, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Jan 27, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint |
| Jan 27, 2026 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care. · from a complaint |
| Jan 27, 2026 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Dec 11, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Dec 11, 2024 | 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. |
| Nov 2, 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 2, 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 2, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Nov 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. |
| Nov 2, 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 2, 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 2, 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 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Nov 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly inform residents or their representatives about arbitration agreements — contracts that give up the right to sue in court — including their right to refuse to sign. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 16).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 9 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 22 | 1 | K ▲ |
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 $194,680, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 27, 2026 | Fine | $194,680 |
| Jan 27, 2026 | Payment Denial | 20 days from Feb 26, 2026 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Minnesota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.87 | 4.83 | 3.95 | top 45% in Minnesota; top 15% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.92 | 1.22 | 0.69 | bottom 24% in Minnesota; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.27 | 4.27 | 3.50 | top 48% in Minnesota; top 16% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.43 | 0.69 | 0.48 | bottom 24% in Minnesota; top 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 40.7 | 42.2 | 45.8 | bottom 48% in Minnesota; top 38% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 44.4 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 38% in Minnesota; bottom 45% 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 4.47, RN 0.84, weekend 3.91. 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
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 |
| Brown, George | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Brown, George | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| DTN Staffing INC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/02/2024 |
| Dykhouse, Dana | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Dykhouse, Dana | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Dynes, Rodney | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/20/2023 |
| Dynes, Rodney | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/20/2023 |
| Engbrecht, Wesley | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Engbrecht, Wesley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
| Fluit, Joel | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2022 |
| Fluit, Joel | Individual | Individual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/06/2026 |
| 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 |
| Gulsvig, Neil | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/30/2024 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Before any service that isn't covered by Medicare or Medicaid, how will you notify us and get our agreement?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
- "If someone reports suspected abuse or neglect here, what happens in the first 24 hours?"
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "What percentage of your residents are on antipsychotic or sedating medications, and how do you work to reduce that?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good Samaritan Society - Mountain Lake | 10.8 mi | Mountain Lake, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Colonial Manor Nursing Home | 12.5 mi | Lakefield, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Good Samaritan Society - Jackson | 17.6 mi | Jackson, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245558.