TRINITY MANOR
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Trinity Manor in Dodge City, Kansas, has a Trust Grade of D, indicating below-average performance with some significant concerns. It ranks #96 out of 295 facilities in the state, placing it in the top half, but #4 out of 6 in Ford County suggests there are better local options. The facility is worsening, with issues increasing from 2 in 2024 to 3 in 2025. Staffing is a relative strength, rated 4 out of 5 stars with a turnover rate of 45%, which is below the state average, but recent fines totaling $29,773 raise concerns, as they are higher than 80% of Kansas facilities. Critical incidents include a resident who fell down stairs due to a malfunctioning door and another who was improperly secured during transport, resulting in a serious injury. While the facility has good RN coverage and overall star ratings, these troubling incidents highlight the need for improvements in safety and supervision.
- Trust Score
- D
- In Kansas
- #96/295
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Worse
- Staff Stability ○ Average
- 45% turnover. Near Kansas's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
- Penalties ✓ Good
- $29,773 in fines. Lower than most Kansas facilities. Relatively clean record.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 56 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than average for Kansas. RNs are trained to catch health problems early.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 15 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average nurse staffing levels
-
4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
-
Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
-
No fines on record
-
Staff turnover below average (45%)
3 points below Kansas average of 48%
Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.
The Bad
Near Kansas avg (46%)
Typical for the industry
Below median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
Part of a multi-facility chain
Ask about local staffing decisions and management
The Ugly 15 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
3 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
Deficiency F0760
(Tag F0760)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility had a census of 40 residents. The sample included 12 residents. Based on observation, record review, and interview ...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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
Food Safety
(Tag F0812)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
The facility had a census of 40 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review the facility failed to store, prepare, and serve food in a sanitary manner for the 40 residents who receiv...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(F)
📢 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 most or all residents
The facility had a census of 40 residents. Based on observation, record review and interview, the facility failed to implement a water management program for Legionella disease (Legionella is a bacter...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2024
1 deficiency
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility census totaled 41 residents with one resident sampled for accidents. Based on observation, interview, and record re...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2024
1 deficiency
1 IJ
CRITICAL
(J)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) - the most serious Medicare violation
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Someone could have died · This affected 1 resident
The facility reported a census of 41 residents with three residents sampled for safety related to transportation outside the facility. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Feb 2023
3 deficiencies
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 Resident (R)34's Minimum Data Set (MDS) tracking form documented the resident discharged to the hospital on [DATE] 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
The facility census totaled 43 residents, with 12 sampled, including five residents for unnecessary medications. Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure adequate monitoring...
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 43 residents. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide sanitary food storage to prevent the spread of food borne illness to ...
Read full inspector narrative →
Jul 2021
7 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0582
(Tag F0582)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
The facility census totaled 32 residents, with three residents reviewed for beneficiary notices. Based on record review and interview, the facility failed to notify Resident (R)183 in advance of Medic...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0602
(Tag F0602)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
The facility reported a census of 32 residents with 12 residents included in the sample. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to prevent the misappropriation of resident's property...
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 32 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
Deficiency F0757
(Tag F0757)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** The facility reported a census of 32 residents, with 12 sampled and five reviewed for unnecessary medications. Based on intervie...
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 32 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
Deficiency F0801
(Tag F0801)
Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents
The facility reported a census of 32 residents. Based on interview and record review the facility failed to employ a Certified Dietary Manager (CDM).
Findings Include:
- On 07/13/21 at 11:50 AM Dieta...
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 32 residents, with one central kitchen. Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to store foods safely and sanitary by the staff's fail...
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
- • 45% turnover. Below Kansas's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: 2 life-threatening violation(s), $29,773 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 15 deficiencies on record, including 2 critical (life-threatening) violations. These warrant careful review before choosing this facility.
- • $29,773 in fines. Higher than 94% of Kansas facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- • Grade D (46/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Trinity Manor's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns TRINITY MANOR an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered 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 Trinity Manor Staffed?
CMS rates TRINITY MANOR's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 45%, compared to the Kansas average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care. 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 Trinity Manor?
State health inspectors documented 15 deficiencies at TRINITY MANOR during 2021 to 2025. These included: 2 Immediate Jeopardy (the most serious level, indicating potential for serious harm or death) and 13 with potential for harm. Immediate Jeopardy findings are rare and represent the most serious regulatory concerns. They require immediate corrective action.
Who Owns and Operates Trinity Manor?
TRINITY MANOR 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 FRONTLINE MANAGEMENT, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 46 certified beds and approximately 38 residents (about 83% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in DODGE CITY, Kansas.
How Does Trinity Manor Compare to Other Kansas Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Kansas, TRINITY MANOR's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.9, staff turnover (45%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Trinity Manor?
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 Trinity Manor Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, TRINITY MANOR has documented safety concerns. Inspectors have issued 2 Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death). The facility has a 4-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 Trinity Manor Stick Around?
TRINITY MANOR has a staff turnover rate of 45%, which is about average for Kansas nursing homes (state average: 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 Trinity Manor Ever Fined?
TRINITY MANOR has been fined $29,773 across 2 penalty actions. This is below the Kansas average of $33,377. While any fine indicates a compliance issue, fines under $50,000 are relatively common and typically reflect isolated problems that were subsequently corrected. Families should ask what specific issues led to these fines and confirm they've been resolved.
Is Trinity Manor on Any Federal Watch List?
TRINITY MANOR 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.