Kansas ›Olathe

Hoeger House

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

20911 West 153rd Street, Olathe, KS 66061 (opens Google Maps) · Johnson County · (913) 397-2900· 34 certified beds · avg 28 residents/day · certified since Oct 20, 2006 · 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★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 14, 2025
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Aug 31, 2023
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.13
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 · Aug 31, 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): 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 21, 2023 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 20 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    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

  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. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    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

View all 20 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
May 14, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
May 14, 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
May 14, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint · F-0880
Aug 31, 2023▲ 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
Aug 31, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Aug 31, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe 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
Aug 31, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 · F-0686
Aug 31, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0690
Aug 31, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0758
Aug 31, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · from a complaint · F-0761
Jan 27, 2022E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · F-0804
Jan 27, 2022E · 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
Jan 27, 2022E · 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
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. · F-0558
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · F-0655
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0686
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide food that accounts for each resident's allergies, intolerances, and personal preferences, or did not offer appealing alternatives. · F-0806
Jan 27, 2022D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide residents with enough to drink, or with drinks matching their needs and preferences, to keep them properly hydrated. · F-0807

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (7 → 3).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2022
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2022100E
202371G ▲
202530F

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 →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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 facilityKansas averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.13
Kansas average: 4.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.85
Kansas average: 0.81
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.58
Kansas average: 4.05
U.S. average: 3.50

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

MeasureThis facilityKansas avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)5.134.583.95top 27% in Kansas; top 11% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.850.810.69top 2% in Kansas; top 2% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.584.053.50top 28% in Kansas; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)1.520.490.48top 1% in Kansas; top 2% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)62.548.145.8bottom 17% in Kansas; bottom 13% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)23.142.042.9top 24% in Kansas; top 18% 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 5.55, RN 2.00, weekend 4.96.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.55 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: —/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Hoeger House. 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 - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Cedar Lake Village INCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%10/20/2006
Olathe Medical Center INCOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest50%01/01/2019
The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan SocietyOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest50%01/01/2019
Bowen, JohnIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/20/1998
Bradley, JamesIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/20/1998
Fitzgerald, RandyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/02/2014
Fitzgerald, RandyIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2014
Herdina, JosephIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE09/09/2013
Herdina, JosephIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/12/2013
Karas, AlexandriaIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE11/27/2017
Syverson, ThomasIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/02/2014
Syverson, ThomasIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2014
Syverson, ThomasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/13/2014

All 13 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

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.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 91 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?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
  • "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"

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 63% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 13 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 (12 closest of 65 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Good Samaritan-Olathe0.2 miOlathe, KS★★★☆☆2/5
The Healthcare Resort of Olathe0.4 miOlathe, KS★★☆☆☆1/5
Azria Health Olathe1.2 miOlathe, KS★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Evergreen Community of Johnson County3.3 miOlathe, KS★★★★★4/5
Villa St Francis Catholic Care Center INC4.3 miOlathe, KS★★★★★3/5
Aberdeen Village4.7 miOlathe, KS★★★★★4/5
Nottingham Health and Rehabilitation4.8 miOlathe, KS★★★★★5/5
Colonial Village5.4 miOverland Park, KS★★☆☆☆2/5
The Plaza Health Services at Santa Marta6.3 miOlathe, KS★★★★★4/5
Stratford Commons Rehab & Health Care Center6.6 miOverland Park, KS★★★☆☆3/5
Meadowbrook Rehabilitation Hospital6.7 miGardner, KS★☆☆☆☆1/5
Spring Hill Care and Rehab7.3 miSpring Hill, KS★★☆☆☆2/5abuse

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Johnson, KS — 35 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 Olathe →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 175491.

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