North DakotaBismarck

St Vincent's - a Prospera Community

1021 N 26th St, Bismarck, ND 58501 · Burleigh County · 97 certified beds · avg 95 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1978

Abuse citation flag (CMS)SFF Candidate

Part of chain: GOOD SAMARITAN SOCIETY (92 facilities, chain avg rating 3.0★)

The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.

1/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
3
Serious findings on record
$44,606
Fines, last 3 years
4.72
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)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 3, 2025 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.

Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.

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: May 7, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Apr 3, 2025 · F-0605 · triggered by a complaint

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.

Why it matters: Using sedating drugs as a 'chemical restraint' can rob residents of alertness and mobility and increases risks of falls and death, especially in people with dementia.

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: May 10, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 29, 2024 · F-0692 · triggered by a complaint

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: Apr 8, 2024 (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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 3, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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
Apr 3, 2025F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not have a written plan describing how it runs its quality improvement program — the ongoing process of finding problems in care and fixing them. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Apr 3, 2025E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not reassess a resident after a significant change in their condition, such as a sudden decline in health. A full new assessment is required when a resident's condition changes in a major way. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Apr 3, 2025C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe facility did not post its nurse staffing information every day. Nursing homes must publicly display how many nurses and aides are on duty each day. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not have enough nursing staff each day to meet every resident's needs, or did not have a licensed nurse in charge on each shift. Adequate staffing is one of the strongest predictors of good care. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Feb 29, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Mar 2, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Mar 2, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (12 → 20).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202330E
2024121G ▲
2025202G ▲

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)

2 fines totaling $44,606.

DateTypeAmount / length
Apr 3, 2025Fine$23,920
Feb 29, 2024Fine$20,686

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

MeasureThis facilityNorth Dakota avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.725.153.95bottom 31% in North Dakota; top 18% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.841.090.69bottom 24% in North Dakota; top 24% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.924.433.50bottom 23% in North Dakota; top 25% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.290.590.48bottom 1% in North Dakota; bottom 29% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)42.948.845.8top 34% in North Dakota; top 44% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)33.340.342.9top 41% in North Dakota; top 33% 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 4.12, RN 0.73, weekend 3.42. 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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 3/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
SanfordOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/01/2019
The Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan SocietyOrganization5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest100%01/01/2019
Al Rabadi, IssaIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2021
Al Rabadi, IssaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/01/2021
Brown, GeorgeIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
Brown, GeorgeIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2025
DTN Staffing INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/02/2024
Dykhouse, DanaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Dykhouse, DanaIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Engbrecht, WesleyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Engbrecht, WesleyIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Fluit, JoelIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Fluit, JoelIndividualIndividual Is an Owner, Partner or Trustee of Any ADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/31/2025
Fluit, JoelIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2022
Focusone SolutionsOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE03/04/2024
Gassen, WilliamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Gassen, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Gassen, WilliamIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024
Grape Tree Medical Staffing LLCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/13/2018
Gulsvig, NeilIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/30/2024

Questions to ask on your visit

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Baptist Health & Rehab1.9 miBismarck, ND★★★★☆4/5
Good Samaritan Society Augusta Place a Prospera Co3.0 miBismarck, ND★★★★★4/5
St Gabriel's Community3.2 miBismarck, ND★★★★★4/5
Missouri Slope3.6 miBismarck, ND★★★★☆3/5
Good Samaritan Society Miller Pointe a Prospera Co4.8 miMandan, ND★★★☆☆2/5
Sunset Drive - a Prospera Community7.8 miMandan, ND★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Dakota Alpha7.9 miMandan, ND★★★★★5/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Bismarck →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 355060.