Solomon Valley Manor
315 S Ash Street, Stockton, KS 67669 · Rooks County · 30 certified beds · avg 28 residents/day · certified since Jan 20, 2012
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
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 · Sep 16, 2021 · F-0689
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 (K): A life-threatening or extremely dangerous situation affected several residents. Among the most serious findings an inspection can produce.
Corrected: Oct 21, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 24, 2024 · F-0689
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: Nov 12, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 24, 2024 · F-0692
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration.
Why it matters: Malnutrition and dehydration can quickly weaken a resident and lead to serious complications.
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: Nov 12, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (16)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Oct 24, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Oct 24, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. |
| Apr 26, 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. |
| Apr 26, 2023 | 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. |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide proper foot care for residents. Foot care includes routine care like nail trimming and attention to foot problems, which matter greatly for older adults. |
| Apr 26, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. |
| Sep 16, 2021 | ▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Sep 16, 2021 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Sep 16, 2021 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 9).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 3 | 1 | K ▲ |
| 2023 | 4 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 9 | 2 | G ▲ |
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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Kansas avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.74 | 4.58 | 3.95 | top 40% in Kansas; top 18% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.93 | 0.81 | 0.69 | top 29% in Kansas; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.15 | 4.05 | 3.50 | top 41% in Kansas; top 19% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.50 | 0.49 | 0.48 | top 38% in Kansas; top 33% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.6 | 48.1 | 45.8 | top 8% in Kansas; top 12% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 14.3 | 42.0 | 42.9 | top 11% in Kansas; top 7% 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 4.25, RN 0.83, weekend 3.71. Staffing rating: 5/5.
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: 1/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Government - City
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership Data Not Available |
Questions to ask on your visit
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?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
- "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?"
- "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
- "Does a pharmacist review every resident's medications and chart monthly, and how are their concerns acted on?"
- "What is your approach to psychiatric medications — how do you try non-drug options first and work to reduce doses over time?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redbud Village | 14.5 mi | Plainville, KS | —/5 | abuse |
Compare this facility with the 1 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 17E637.