MANOR OF THE PLAINS
Over 2 years since last inspection. Current conditions may differ from available data.
Manor of the Plains in Dodge City, Kansas has a Trust Grade of B, indicating it is a good choice overall, though not without some concerns. It ranks #26 out of 295 facilities in Kansas, placing it in the top half of state options, and is the best facility among six in Ford County. The facility's performance has been stable, with five issues identified in both 2021 and 2023, which suggests consistent oversight but also ongoing challenges. Staffing is a strength here, with a perfect 5-star rating and RN coverage that exceeds 75% of Kansas facilities, although the turnover rate is average at 52%. While there have been no fines, which is a positive sign, there are critical concerns, such as a resident developing aspiration pneumonia due to improper dietary management and food safety issues, including expired items found in storage and malfunctioning kitchen equipment.
- Trust Score
- B
- In Kansas
- #26/295
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Holding Steady
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 52% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kansas facilities.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 61 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Kansas nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 16 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Kansas avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 16 deficiencies on record
Sept 2023
5 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Pharmacy Services
(Tag F0755)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility census totaled 29 residents with 12 included in the sample with five reviewed for medications. Based on observation...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 29 residents with 12 residents included in the sample, that included five residents reviewed f...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility census totaled 29 residents with 12 included in the sample, that included five residents reviewed for unnecessary m...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
The facility census totaled 29 residents with 12 included in the sample. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure a clean sanitary environment for residents of...
Read full inspector narrative →
MINOR
(C)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact
Staffing Data
(Tag F0851)
Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents
The facility reported a census of 29 residents. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to submit complete and accurate staffing information to the federal regulatory agency through ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2021
5 deficiencies
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Menu Adequacy
(Tag F0803)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility census totaled 30 residents, which included seven residents who required a mechanically altered diet (foods that ca...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 30 residents, with 12 sampled, including five for unnecessary medications. Based on interview ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Medication Errors
(Tag F0758)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 30 residents, with 12 sampled, including five for unnecessary medications. Based on interview ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
The facility reported a census of 30 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store food in a safe, sanitary manner and in accordance with professional stan...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Room Equipment
(Tag F0908)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
The facility reported a census totaling 30 residents. Based on observation and interview, the facility failed to maintain all mechanical care equipment in safe operating condition, when the kitchen to...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2020
6 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Resident Rights
(Tag F0550)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 33 residents with 12 sampled including three for indwelling catheters. Based on observation, i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Transfer Notice
(Tag F0623)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - Review of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) tracking form dated February 2020 revealed R14 discharged to the hospital on [DATE] and r...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0625
(Tag F0625)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 33 residents with 12 residents in the sample with two reviewed for hospitalization. Based on i...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Drug Regimen Review
(Tag F0756)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - Review of R20's pertinent diagnoses from the 01/16/20 Physician's Order Sheet revealed heart disease (disorder of the heart) a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** - Review of R20's pertinent diagnoses from the 01/16/20 Physician's Order Sheet revealed heart disease (disorder of the heart) a...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
The facility census totaled 33 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to ensure proper glove use/hand washing, proper documentation (logs) of testing sanitiz...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What changes have you made since the serious inspection findings?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Kansas facilities.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 1 life-threatening violation(s). Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 16 deficiencies on record, including 1 critical (life-threatening) violation. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
About This Facility
What is Manor Of The Plains's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns MANOR OF THE PLAINS an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Kansas, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.
How is Manor Of The Plains Staffed?
CMS rates MANOR OF THE PLAINS's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 52%, compared to the Kansas average of 46%. RN turnover specifically is 60%, which is notably high. RNs provide skilled clinical oversight, so turnover in this role can affect medical care quality.
What Have Inspectors Found at Manor Of The Plains?
State health inspectors documented 16 deficiencies at MANOR OF THE PLAINS during 2020 to 2023. These included: 1 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death), 14 with potential for harm, and 1 minor or isolated issues. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Manor Of The Plains?
MANOR OF THE PLAINS is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by PRESBYTERIAN MANORS OF MID-AMERICA, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 50 certified beds and approximately 27 residents (about 54% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in DODGE CITY, Kansas.
How Does Manor Of The Plains Compare to Other Kansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kansas, MANOR OF THE PLAINS's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (52%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Manor Of The Plains?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What changes have been made since the serious inspection findings, and how are you preventing similar issues?" "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?" These questions are particularly relevant given the facility's Immediate Jeopardy citations.
Is Manor Of The Plains Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, MANOR OF THE PLAINS has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 1 Immediate Jeopardy citation (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Kansas. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Manor Of The Plains Stick Around?
MANOR OF THE PLAINS has a staff turnover rate of 52%, which is 6 percentage points above the Kansas average of 46%. Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.
Was Manor Of The Plains Ever Fined?
MANOR OF THE PLAINS has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.
Is Manor Of The Plains on Any Federal Watch List?
MANOR OF THE PLAINS is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.