Strand-Kjorsvig Community Rest Home
801 S Main, Roslyn, SD 57261 · Day County · 35 certified beds · avg 30 residents/day · certified since Aug 25, 2008
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 2/5
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 · Sep 11, 2024 · 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): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Oct 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Sep 11, 2024 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.
Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.
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: Oct 8, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (23)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 8, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility was not managed in a way that uses its money, staff, and resources effectively and efficiently to care for residents. |
| May 8, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility provided care that did not meet professional standards of quality — the accepted standards that nurses and other clinicians are expected to follow. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not designate a qualified infection preventionist — a trained person responsible for running the infection prevention and control program. |
| May 8, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| May 8, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. |
| May 8, 2025 | 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. |
| Sep 11, 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 11, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint |
| Jan 4, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jan 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. |
| Jan 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. |
| Nov 17, 2022 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. |
| Nov 17, 2022 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. |
| Nov 17, 2022 | 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (3 → 15).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 3 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 5 | 2 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 15 | 0 | F |
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)
7 fines totaling $41,495.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 11, 2024 | Fine | $11,466 |
| Feb 6, 2024 | Fine | $4,893 |
| Jan 8, 2024 | Fine | $4,893 |
| Jan 2, 2024 | Fine | $344 |
| Dec 11, 2023 | Fine | $3,667 |
| Oct 10, 2023 | Fine | $4,587 |
| Sep 18, 2023 | Fine | $11,645 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | South Dakota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.22 | 4.32 | 3.95 | top 45% in South Dakota; top 31% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.21 | 0.91 | 0.69 | top 15% in South Dakota; top 9% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.37 | 3.71 | 3.50 | bottom 45% in South Dakota; top 49% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.63 | 0.51 | 0.48 | top 25% in South Dakota; top 21% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 48.0 | 48.2 | 45.8 | bottom 48% in South Dakota; bottom 42% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 16.7 | 34.7 | 42.9 | top 17% in South Dakota; top 9% 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 3.25, RN 0.93, weekend 2.60. 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aadland, Lonnie | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/17/2015 |
| Deutsch, Shelley | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/25/2008 |
| Eidahl, Doug | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/20/2018 |
| Hanson, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2018 |
| Samson, Krissa | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/16/2008 |
| Schmidt, Shannon | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/04/2012 |
| Schmidt, Shannon | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 06/04/2012 |
| Trautner, Helen | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/25/2008 |
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?"
- "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
- "What were the findings behind this administration citation, and what has leadership changed since?"
- "How does your quality improvement program work, and can you share a recent example of a problem you found and fixed?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you share an example of a problem it identified and fixed?"
- "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
- "What does the care plan for a brand-new resident cover in the first 48 hours, and who writes it?"
- "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bethesda Home | 10.8 mi | Webster, SD | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Sun Dial Manor | 16.3 mi | Bristol, SD | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 2 closest →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 435125.