SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER
Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.
Scotchman Living Center in Philip, South Dakota has received a Trust Grade of F, indicating significant concerns about the facility's care quality. Ranking #92 out of 95 in the state places it in the bottom half of nursing homes, although it is the only option in Haakon County. While the facility is improving, with issues decreasing from 8 in 2024 to 1 in 2025, there are still serious concerns, including $77,730 in fines, which is higher than 94% of other South Dakota facilities. Staffing is a relative strength, with a 4/5 star rating and better RN coverage than 79% of state facilities, but the facility has faced serious incidents, such as a resident falling and sustaining head trauma due to improper assistance and another resident developing a wound from neglect during a transfer. Families should weigh these strengths against the significant issues reported when considering this nursing home for their loved ones.
- Trust Score
- F
- In South Dakota
- #92/95
- Safety Record
- High Risk
- Inspections
- Getting Better
- Staff Stability ⚠ Watch
- 51% turnover. Above average. Higher turnover means staff may not know residents' routines.
- Penalties ⚠ Watch
- $77,730 in fines. Higher than 86% of South Dakota facilities, suggesting repeated compliance issues.
- Skilled Nurses ✓ Good
- Each resident gets 67 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of South Dakota nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
- Violations ⚠ Watch
- 13 deficiencies on record. Higher than average. Multiple issues found across inspections.
The Good
-
4-Star Staffing Rating · Above-average 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
Below South Dakota average (2.7)
Significant quality concerns identified by CMS
Near South Dakota avg (46%)
Higher turnover may affect care consistency
Well above median ($33,413)
Moderate penalties - review what triggered them
The Ugly 13 deficiencies on record
Jan 2025
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on South Dakota Department of Health (SD DOH) facility reported incident (FRI), interview, record review, and policy revie...
Read full inspector narrative →
Dec 2024
7 deficiencies
2 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
Based on interview, observation, and document review, the provider failed to protect one of one sampled resident's (4) right to be free from neglect by one of one certified nursing assistant (CNA) N w...
Read full inspector narrative →
SERIOUS
(G)
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Pressure Ulcer Prevention
(Tag F0686)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on record review, observation, interview, and policy review, the provider failed to adequately treat pressure injuries for...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0657
(Tag F0657)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, record review, interview, and policy review, the provider failed to ensure four of sixteen sampled residents (4, 8, 21, and 22) had their care plans updated, and revised promptly...
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
Accident Prevention
(Tag F0689)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on South Dakota Department of Health (SD DOH) facility-reported incident (FRI) review, observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the provider failed to ensure the safety of one o...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0692
(Tag F0692)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, record review, interview, and policy review, the provider failed to follow their Resident Weight policy an...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Respiratory Care
(Tag F0695)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the provider failed to follow their policy related to oxygen administration for two of five sampled residents (4 and 12) who received...
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
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on observation, interview, and document review, the provider failed to properly label foods and discard foods on or before...
Read full inspector narrative →
Mar 2024
1 deficiency
1 Harm
SERIOUS
(G)
📢 Someone Reported This
A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint
Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures
Free from Abuse/Neglect
(Tag F0600)
A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on review of the South Dakota Department of Health (SD DOH) complaint online report, interview, and policy review, the pro...
Read full inspector narrative →
Aug 2023
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review, review of the 8/29/23 Required Healthcare Facility Event Reporting form, and policy review, the provider failed to investigate and report in a timely ma...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Deficiency F0658
(Tag F0658)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the provider failed to ensure the following:
*Care-specific details regarding one of one sampled resident's (32) skin condition and s...
Read full inspector narrative →
Oct 2022
2 deficiencies
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Report Alleged Abuse
(Tag F0609)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, record review, and policy review, the provider failed to ensure one of one sampled resident (2) with a fall resulting in an injury had:
*Completed a thorough investiga...
Read full inspector narrative →
CONCERN
(D)
Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed
Infection Control
(Tag F0880)
Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident
Based on observation, interview, and policy review the provider failed to ensure:
*A protective barrier was placed under a wound prior to a dressing change for one of two sampled residents (15).
*A c...
Read full inspector narrative →
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Questions to Ask on Your Visit
- "What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse and neglect?"
- "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
- "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"
Our Honest Assessment
- • Licensed and certified facility. Meets minimum state requirements.
- • Multiple safety concerns identified: Federal abuse finding, 4 harm violation(s), $77,730 in fines. Review inspection reports carefully.
- • 13 deficiencies on record, including 4 serious (caused harm) violations. Ask about corrective actions taken.
- • $77,730 in fines. Extremely high, among the most fined facilities in South Dakota. Major compliance failures.
- • Grade F (0/100). Below average facility with significant concerns.
About This Facility
What is Scotchman Living Center's CMS Rating?
CMS assigns SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER an overall rating of 1 out of 5 stars, which is considered much below average nationally. Within South Dakota, this rating places the facility higher than 0% of the state's 100 nursing homes. A rating at this level reflects concerns identified through health inspections, staffing assessments, or quality measures that families should carefully consider.
How is Scotchman Living Center Staffed?
CMS rates SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER's staffing level at 4 out of 5 stars, which is above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 51%, compared to the South Dakota 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 Scotchman Living Center?
State health inspectors documented 13 deficiencies at SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER during 2022 to 2025. These included: 4 that caused actual resident harm and 9 with potential for harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.
Who Owns and Operates Scotchman Living Center?
SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER is owned by a non-profit organization. Non-profit facilities reinvest revenue into operations rather than distributing to shareholders. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 42 certified beds and approximately 30 residents (about 71% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in PHILIP, South Dakota.
How Does Scotchman Living Center Compare to Other South Dakota Nursing Homes?
Compared to the 100 nursing homes in South Dakota, SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER's overall rating (1 stars) is below the state average of 2.7, staff turnover (51%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (2 stars) is below the national benchmark.
What Should Families Ask When Visiting Scotchman Living Center?
Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "What safeguards and monitoring systems are in place to protect residents from abuse or neglect?" "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 substantiated abuse finding on record.
Is Scotchman Living Center Safe?
Based on CMS inspection data, SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER has documented safety concerns. The facility has 1 substantiated abuse finding (meaning confirmed case of resident harm by staff or other residents). The facility has a 1-star overall rating and ranks #100 of 100 nursing homes in South Dakota. Families considering this facility should ask detailed questions about what corrective actions have been taken since these incidents.
Do Nurses at Scotchman Living Center Stick Around?
SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER has a staff turnover rate of 51%, which is 5 percentage points above the South Dakota 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 Scotchman Living Center Ever Fined?
SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER has been fined $77,730 across 3 penalty actions. This is above the South Dakota average of $33,856. Fines in this range indicate compliance issues significant enough for CMS to impose meaningful financial consequences. Common causes include delayed correction of deficiencies, repeat violations, or care failures affecting resident safety. Families should ask facility leadership what changes have been made since these penalties.
Is Scotchman Living Center on Any Federal Watch List?
SCOTCHMAN LIVING CENTER 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.