Solomon Valley Manor

315 S Ash Street, Stockton, KS 67669 (opens Google Maps) · Rooks County · (785) 425-6754· 30 certified beds · avg 28 residents/day · certified since Jan 20, 2012 · Medicaid only — not Medicare certified

Certified for Medicaid only. It cannot bill Medicare, so a short post-hospital rehabilitation stay would not be covered the usual way here. Who pays for nursing home care →

3/5

Health inspection rating (on-site)

inspected Oct 24, 2024

Serious findings on record

most recent Oct 24, 2024

Fines, last 3 years

4.74

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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · 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, pattern · 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): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was a pattern: more than a limited occurrence, without being widespread. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Oct 21, 2021 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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): 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: Nov 12, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · 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.

Corrected: Nov 12, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 16 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

Oct 24, 2024G · 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. F-0689
Oct 24, 2024G · Actual harm, isolated
The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. F-0692
Oct 24, 2024F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread
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. F-0868

View all 16 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.

Date	Severity	What the facility was cited for
Oct 24, 2024	▲ 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. · F-0689
Oct 24, 2024	▲ G · Actual harm, isolated	The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692
Oct 24, 2024	F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread	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. · F-0868
Oct 24, 2024	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
Oct 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0657
Oct 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0686
Oct 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0756
Oct 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0758
Oct 24, 2024	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0812
Apr 26, 2023	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. · F-0812
Apr 26, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0550
Apr 26, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0687
Apr 26, 2023	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Sep 16, 2021	▲ K · Immediate jeopardy, pattern	The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689
Sep 16, 2021	E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern	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. · F-0812
Sep 16, 2021	D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated	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. · F-0676

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 9).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01

All citationsSerious citations (G–L)

2021

2023

2024

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

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)

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)

4.74

4.58

3.95

Registered Nurse hours

0.93

0.81

0.69

Weekend total nurse staffing

4.15

4.05

3.50

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

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 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 4.25, RN 0.83, weekend 3.71.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.25 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: 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 Solomon Valley Manor. 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 →

Government - City

Owner / manager	Type	Role	Stake	Since
		Ownership Data Not Available

All 1 owning or managing party 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 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?"

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 29% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
"Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

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 →

All facilities in Stockton →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 17E637.