Kansas ›Little River

Sandstone Heights

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

440 State Street, Little River, KS 67457 (opens Google Maps) · Rice County · (620) 897-6266· 36 certified beds · avg 26 residents/day · certified since Oct 1, 2008 · 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 →

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 13, 2025
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Mar 13, 2025
$67,763
Fines, last 3 years
4.75
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: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5 · 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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jan 16, 2024 · F-0602 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds.

Why it matters: Residents can lose money, jewelry, or cherished possessions to theft or misuse.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. 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: Jan 29, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Mar 13, 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): 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 21, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

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

  1. 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

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

    The facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint F-0851

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. F-0625

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
Mar 13, 2025▲ 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
Mar 13, 2025F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not electronically submit complete and accurate staffing information to the government, based on payroll and other verifiable records. · from a complaint · F-0851
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not give the resident or their representative written notice of how long it would hold the resident's bed during a hospital stay or approved leave. · F-0625
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Mar 13, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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 16, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not protect residents from misuse of their belongings or money — this is called misappropriation, and it includes theft or improper use of a resident's property or funds. · from a complaint · F-0602
Jun 15, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. · F-0727
Jun 15, 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. · F-0880
Jun 15, 2023F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Jun 15, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not treat residents with respect and dignity, or did not let them keep and use their own personal belongings. · F-0557
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly plan a resident's discharge to meet the resident's goals and needs after leaving. · F-0660
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedWhen a resident had a planned discharge, the facility did not make sure the necessary information was communicated to the resident and to the doctors or facility taking over their care. · F-0661
Jun 15, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0677
Nov 4, 2021F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. · F-0882
Nov 4, 2021E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. · F-0881
Nov 4, 2021D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Nov 4, 2021D · 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. · F-0761
Nov 4, 2021D · 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. · F-0880

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 5).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2021
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2023
All citations: 9
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202150F
202390F
202411J ▲
202551G ▲

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 →

2 fines totaling $67,763, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

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.

DateTypeAmount / length
Mar 13, 2025Fine$41,262
Mar 13, 2025Payment Denial40 days from Apr 11, 2025
Jan 16, 2024Fine$26,501

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: 4.75
Kansas average: 4.58
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.26
Kansas average: 0.81
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.32
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)4.754.583.95top 39% in Kansas; top 17% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.260.810.69top 13% in Kansas; top 8% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.324.053.50top 35% in Kansas; top 15% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.810.490.48top 11% in Kansas; top 11% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)58.848.145.8bottom 21% in Kansas; bottom 18% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)40.042.042.9top 48% in Kansas; top 46% 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 4.18, RN 1.11, weekend 3.80.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.18 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sandstone Heights. 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 - Other

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Rice County Hospital District No 2Organization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%07/01/1989
Decker, JamesIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2003
Decker, JamesIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2003
Lehman, AbigailIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2023
Look, TreyIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2022
Look, TreyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/27/2025
Olander, RandallIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE07/13/2015
Olander, RandallIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/13/2015
Schlosser, ToddIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2017
Schlosser, ToddIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/27/2025
Turner, NancyIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2025
Wempe, JohnIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2021
Whorton, AllenIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2021
Whorton, AllenIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2025
Willard, DavidIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2025

All 15 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

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 safeguards do you have to protect residents' money and belongings, and what happens when something goes missing?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "How do your actual daily staffing levels compare to what's reported on Medicare's Care Compare website?"
  • "If my family member goes to the hospital, how long will you hold their bed, and will we get that in writing?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
  • "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"

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 59% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 15 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 (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Riverview Estates14.5 miMarquette, KS★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Sterling Village16.5 miSterling, KS★★★☆☆2/5
Pleasant View Home17.6 miInman, KS★★★☆☆3/5
McPherson Operator, LLC19.0 miMcPherson, KS★★★☆☆3/5
The Cedars19.8 miMcPherson, KS★★★☆☆4/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Little River →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 175509.

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