How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Sunnyside Care Center
16561 Us Highway 10, Lake Park, MN 56554 (opens Google Maps) · Becker County · (218) 238-5944· 30 certified beds · avg 27 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1992 · 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 →
4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jun 9, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Apr 17, 2026
$0
Fines, last 3 years
5.66
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 17, 2026 · 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Apr 17, 2026 · 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: Apr 15, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 12 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
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. · from a complaint F-0880
The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. F-0552
View all 12 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Apr 17, 2026 | ▲ 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 |
| Apr 17, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0880 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand. · F-0552 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| Jun 11, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · F-0880 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | 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 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0554 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641 |
| Mar 6, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. · F-0688 |
Inspection trend by year
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 1
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 5 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 5 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 2 | 1 | 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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMinnesota averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 5.66
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.04
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.99
Minnesota average: 4.27
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Minnesota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 5.66 | 4.83 | 3.95 | top 15% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.04 | 1.22 | 0.69 | bottom 39% in Minnesota; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.99 | 4.27 | 3.50 | top 15% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.61 | 0.69 | 0.48 | top 49% in Minnesota; top 23% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.9 | 42.2 | 45.8 | top 18% in Minnesota; top 12% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 22.2 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 22% in Minnesota; top 17% 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 5.07, RN 0.93, weekend 4.47.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.07 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Sunnyside Care Center. 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 - County
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amundson, Samantha | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/11/2019 |
| Becker County | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Boman, Priscilla | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/22/2019 |
| Christensen, Johanna | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/11/2019 |
| Grimsley, Benjamin | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2010 |
| Heide, Kenneth | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/22/2016 |
| Hendren, Caroline | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Knoll, Christopher | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Larson, Julie | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Larson, Julie | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/19/2025 |
| McNally, Ashley | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/19/2019 |
| McNally, Ashley | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/09/2025 |
| Meyer, David | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/24/2023 |
| Minnewaska Lutheran Home | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 08/01/2023 |
| Minnewaska Lutheran Home | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/30/2026 |
| Nelson, Barry | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2005 |
All 16 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.
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?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "How do you explain health changes and treatment options to residents and their families?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "If my family member is able to manage their own medications, would you allow it, and how is that decided?"
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?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 16 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)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essentia Health Oak Crossing | 10.8 mi | Detroit Lakes, MN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Emmanuel Nursing Home | 11.3 mi | Detroit Lakes, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Viking Manor Nursing Home | 17.2 mi | Ulen, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Frazee Care Center | 19.5 mi | Frazee, MN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 |
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245597.