Hearth Record

Sanford Usd Medical Center

An acute care hospital in Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57117

1305 W 18th St Post Office Box 5039, Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57117. (605) 333-1000.

CMS’s own record, on Care Compare

Watch and the shortlist are kept with a free account, on every device. Your watch list. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare.

The short answer

Record last released by CMS on Oct 20, 2026.

The last 24 months 1 deficiency in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. Every month

Each figure’s source sits beside it, in its section below.

What these words mean4
Star ratings
CMS rates some kinds of place from 1 to 5 stars, more stars meaning better on CMS’s own measures for that kind: for a nursing home, its health inspections, staffing and quality measures. A rating is CMS’s summary of those measures; it doesn’t promise good care. Source: CMS, Care Compare and the Five-Star Quality Rating System.
Inspection (survey)
A visit by state inspectors, often unannounced, who check a place against the rules it must meet. For nursing homes and other places Medicare pays, CMS calls these visits surveys: a standard survey of a nursing home comes at least every 15 months, and a complaint survey whenever a complaint calls for one. Source: CMS; 42 CFR 488.308.
Deficiency, citation, violation
What inspectors write up when a place didn’t meet a rule: the rule, what they saw, and when. CMS calls it a deficiency; states may say citation or violation. It is the inspectors’ finding, not a court’s, and the place is usually asked for a plan to correct it. Source: CMS, statement of deficiencies (Form CMS-2567); each state’s licensing agency.
Condition-level deficiency
For hospices, home health agencies, hospitals and dialysis facilities, CMS writes deficiencies at two levels. Standard is the usual one; condition-level is the more serious, when a problem is serious enough that the provider doesn’t meet a whole condition of taking part in Medicare. Source: CMS, State Operations Manual.

What did inspectors find?

The last inspection on record was on Oct 16, 2024: a complaint inspection.

1 deficiency cited in the last three years, 1 of them at condition level, the most serious.

1 deficiency at condition level, the more serious of CMS’s two levels

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

When those deficiencies happened

1 deficiency in 1 month of the last 36. Last cited Apr 2024. Most serious: Condition-level. The last 3 years, to Nov 5, 2026.

1 deficiency by month over the last 3 years. Each cell is one month.
JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2023 Dec
2024 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2025 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec
2026 JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNov

Hover or focus a month to read it.

No visit on record Visited, nothing cited A stronger orange is more serious, on its source’s own levels, read onto four bands: from the least serious it publishes to the most
Source:

Hearth Record drew this from the dates and levels in the source’s own records.

Each deficiency, as cited

Rule titles as CMS’s inspectors cite them, set in sentence case.

Source:

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Apr 18, 2024: complaint inspection1 deficiency
  • Nursing Services

    The inspectors’ words, 1,636 words

    “NURSING SERVICES CFR(s): 482.23 The hospital must have an organized nursing service that provides 24-hour nursing services. The nursing services must be furnished or supervised by a registered nurse. This Condition is not met as evidenced by: 45383 Based on review of the South Dakota Department of Health (SD DOH) complaint intake information, interview, record review, job description review, and policy review the provider failed to ensure: *One of one sampled patient (4) who had and elevated heart rate that was identified by monitor technician (MT) (L) was reported to registered nurse (RN) M. *One of one sampled patient (4) had vital signs monitored per physician’s order during an infusion of diltiazem (a heart rate controlling medication) by RN M. Findings include: These failures have the potential to cause life threatening events to patients who are dependent upon the provider to ensure their safety while under their care. Notice: On 4/17/24 at 5:15 p.m. facility’s chief operating officer (COO) N, chief nursing officer (CNO) H, director of cardiology A, director of quality and safety J, director of risk and patient relations K was informed of an IJ situation related to nursing services A385. The provider failed to ensure patient safety while monitoring the heart rate and blood pressure during care provided on 2/17/24. Plan: The facility provided the following acceptable removal plan on 4/18/24 at 2:30 p.m. for nursing services: 1.” MT L will be off work until a 1:1 conversation occurs with the Director of Cardiology. During the conversation, further clarification will be received from MT L to determine what occurred, from her perspective, and to utilize the organization’s Performance Management Decision Guide (PMDG). Upon completion of this conversation, the Director of Cardiology will consult Human Resources (HR) to determine the next steps of the employee’s corrective action per the PMDG. If at any point during MT L’s 1:1, the Director of Cardiology has concern for potential patient harm, MT L will remain off work.” 2.”The policy, “Clinical Alarm Management-Enterprise” was reviewed on 4/18/24 by the Chief Operating Officer, the Chief Nursing Officer, Vice President of Operations for Cardiovascular Services, Director of Cardiology, Director of Quality and Safety, and Accreditation Specialist. No changes were recommended at this time.” 3.”Starting on 4/17/24 Night Shift all Monitor studio staff that interpret heart rhythms and rates, including PRN staff, will be provided education regarding the urgency of notifying the nurse caring for monitored patients. Verification of compliance will be completed with a ready and sign where objectives are identified.” 4.”Starting on 4/18/24 Day Shift, education will be provided to nurses including PRN nurse, regarding the importance of following the physician’s orders for monitoring vital signs during diltiazem infusions.These departments include 1000 Pulmonary, Pulm Acute, 4100 Surgical/Renal, 3000, 3800 Cardiology, 2000 Surgical Trauma, 2800 Surgical Cardiovascular Specialty, Critical Care2, Critical Care 3, Neuro Acute Care Unit (NACU), Emergency Department, PACU, Interventional Radiology, and Central Resource Pool. Verification of compliance will be completed with a ready and sign where objectives are identified.” 5.”For ongoing compliance monitoring of the MTs, 50 red alarms for heart rate and rhythm, per day, will be audited by the Director of Cardiology or designee for appropriate workflow and notification of the nurse caring for the monitored patient. This audit will remain in place for 1 month with a goal of achieving 95% compliance. Following the completion of this month, 25 red alarms for heart rate and rhythm will be audited on a weekly basis for 5 months with a goal of achieving 95% compliance.” 6.”For ongoing compliance of RNs monitoring vital signs during diltiazem infusions, 5 patients during the duration of their diltiazem infusion (dependent on patient volumes) will be audited by the department director or designee per week for 1 month with a goal of achieving 90% compliance. Following the completion of this 1 month, 5 patients during the duration of their diltiazem infusion (dependent on patient volumes) will be audited per month for 6 months with a goal of achieving 90% compliance.” 7.”Audits will be reported to Quality Council on a monthly basis for at least 6 months. Upon completion of the six months, Quality will determine the ongoing process.” The removal plan for the IJ was received and accepted on 4/18/24 at 2:30 p.m. On 4/18/24 at 3:00 p.m. the implementation of the plan was verified and the IJ status was removed while the surveyors were onsite. 1. Review of patient 4’s electronic medical record (EMR) revealed: *He: -Had been admitted on 2/15/24 with diagnoses of weakness, diarrhea, and then developed uncontrolled atrial fibrillation (an elevated heart rate and an irregular heart rhythm). -Had an elevated heart rate on 2/17/24 at 8:17 a.m. of 161 beats per minute (normal heart rate is 60-100 beats per minute). -Was started on a diltiazem infusion at 5 milligram (mg) per hour per physician’s order. *”Administration orders:” -“Initiate infusion at 5 mg per hour or continue dose if transferred in.” -“Increase or decrease the infusion by 5 mg per hour every 30 minutes as needed to maintain heart rate less than 100 beats per minute, not to exceed ordered dose.” -“Hold for heart rate less than 60 beats per minute or a systolic blood pressure less than 90 millimeter of mercury (mm HG).” -“Notify the provider if maximum ordered dose is not sufficient to achieve hemodynamic (blood flow) goal.” -“When discontinuing, decrease infusion by 5 mg per hour every 30 minutes until off, while maintaining goal parameters.” -“Vital signs every 30 minutes x 2. Then vital signs every 1-hour x 2. Then check every 4 hours. Restart vital sign frequency with each rate change.” *On 2/17/24 at 1:45 p.m. the diltiazem infusion was increased to 10 mg per hour. -At 4:59 p.m. the infusion was decreased to 5 mg per hour. -At 5:52 p.m. the infusion was discontinued. *On 2/17/24 at 4:58 p.m. a heart rate of 88 beats per minute and a blood pressure of 107/68 had been documented. *There were no other vital signs documented for patient 4 during the diltiazem infusion. Interview on 4/16/24 at 8:45 a.m. with MT O regarding monitor alarms and nurse notification revealed: *She: -Monitored patient’s heart rate, rhythm, and oxygen saturation. -Had parameters to follow for each patient depending on their diagnosis. -Would have notified the nurse caring for the patient if there were any changes not within those parameters. Interview on 4/17/24 at 8:21 a.m. with director of cardiology A regarding heart rate monitoring revealed: *She: -Had taken a “deep dive” into patient 4’s chart since there was a complaint associated with the patient. -Had identified that MT L had not notified the nurse caring for patient 4 with an elevated heart rate. -Would have expected other nursing staff to respond to alarms if the nurse caring for the patient was unavailable. -Had not been able to speak with MT L regarding the incident due to illness and scheduling. -Had coached MT L last year for not reporting identified abnormal heart rates to the nurse caring for a patient. -Had concluded her investigation regarding this complaint on 2/29/24. Review of MT L’s work schedule from 2/17/24 through 4/15/24 revealed she had worked 10 shifts. Interview on 4/17/24 at 9:45 a.m. with accreditation specialist I and director of risk and patient relations K regarding the monitoring of patient 4’s vital signs by RN M during a diltiazem infusion revealed they both agreed: *There had been only one set of vital signs taken from the start to the stop of the infusion. *The physician order had not been followed. Interview on 4/17/24 at 10:05 a.m. with director of cardiology A and CNO H regarding RN M monitoring patient 4’s vital signs during a diltiazem infusion revealed: *CNO H had spoken to RN M, she had forgotten to data validate the vital signs.(ensures the vital signs are documented into the patient’s EMR) *They both believed that RN M had monitored the vital signs they just were not documented. *They would have expected the staff to document the patient’s vital signs in their EMR. Interview on 4/18/24 at 8:30 a.m. with accreditation specialist I, regarding documentation of RN M’s coaching regarding data validating vital signs revealed: *He had coached RN M that morning regarding data validating vital signs. *There was documentation to support he had coached RN M that morning. Review of the provider’s job description for cardiac/monitor technician revealed: *”The cardiac technician conducts a wide range of non-invasive cardiac test, under direct supervision, for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.” *”Performs cardiac tests and monitors patient heart functions using diverse cardiology equipment. As needed- per department, employees place electrodes correctly for an electrocardiogram (EKG) machine or telemetry (Holter) monitoring and operate machines correctly. Checks, calibrates, and maintains cardiology equipment to ensure proper operation and accurate test results. Provided care and counseling for cardiac patients to ensure their comfort and safety during cardiac tests and treatments. Alert nurses or physicians of critical values, abnormalities, or change in patient response. Obtain and records patient information and medical histories; interprets electrocardiogram (EKG) results and generates factual written reports. In some departments, employees will monitor multiple patients at the same time while critically interpreting rhythms and communicating concerns effectively with staff.” Review of the provider’s Cardiology Monitor Studio Call Routines revealed: *”Call RN:” -“Acute change in heart rate from baseline heart rate greater than 110 beats per minute of less than 60 beats per minute.” -“Heart rate greater than 125 beats per minute of less than 45 beats per minute, atrial fibrillation heart rate greater than 100 beats per minute.” -“Blood Pressure systolic blood pressure greater than 160 or less than 90. Diastolic blood pressure greater than 90.” -“Rhythm run of ventricular tachycardia (a life threatening heart rhythm) or 3 beats of premature ventricular contractions, new arrhythmia, QTC greater than 550, pauses greater than 2.5 seconds.””

    Rule A0385. Condition-level. From a complaint.

All 2 inspections in the last three years
Inspections on record
DateVisitWhat the record says
Oct 16, 2024Complaint inspectionNo deficiencies cited
Apr 18, 2024Complaint inspection1 deficiency cited

How do patients fare?

  • CMS’s overall for it is 5 of 5.
  • Of the measures behind its , CMS counts against the national value: mortality, 4 better and 0 worse of 8; safety of care, 3 better and 0 worse of 8; readmission, 2 better and 0 worse of 11.
  • Patients rate it 3 of 5 in CMS’s patient survey (372 surveys completed, Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): 73% rated it 9 or 10 out of 10, and 74% would definitely recommend it.
  • Infections, compared by CMS with the national benchmark (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025): central line bloodstream infections (CLABSI), better than the national benchmark; catheter urinary tract infections (CAUTI), no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after colon surgery, no different than national benchmark; surgical site infections after abdominal hysterectomy, no different than national benchmark; MRSA bloodstream infections, no different than national benchmark; C. diff infections, better than the national benchmark.
  • CMS’s patient safety composite for serious complications, PSI 90, Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2024: better than the national value.
  • Deaths within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2022 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 10.9%, heart failure 11.2%, pneumonia 13.2%, COPD 9.8%, stroke 10.6%, heart bypass surgery 2.6%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • Readmissions within 30 days, as CMS gives them (Jul 1, 2023 to Jun 30, 2025): heart attack 13.5%, heart failure 20.5%, pneumonia 17.1%, COPD 19.4%, heart bypass surgery 10.3%, hip or knee replacement 5.4%. CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for them in this release.
  • After outpatient care, compared by CMS: unplanned hospital visits after a colonoscopy, better than the national rate; hospital admissions after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; emergency visits after outpatient chemotherapy, no different than the national rate; unplanned hospital visits after outpatient surgery, better than expected.
  • Emergency department patients spent a median of 207 minutes there before leaving (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025), and 4% left before being seen.
  • 42% of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock got the care CMS measures, SEP-1 (Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025).
  • Medicare’s spending per patient here is 1.07 times the national median (Jan 1, 2024 to Dec 31, 2024).
Ratings and measures, as published
MeasureRating
Overall ratingCMS’s overall hospital quality star rating, 1 to 55 of 5
Patient survey ratingCMS star rating from its survey of the hospital’s patients (HCAHPS), 1 to 53 of 5

Is it certified, and in good standing?

  • Medicare-certified acute care hospital since Jul 1, 1966.
  • Ownership: voluntary non-profit - private.
  • It is accredited by The Joint Commission, whose surveys stand in for the state’s routine inspections.
  • Cited at in the last three years: it didn’t meet a whole condition of Medicare’s rules for hospitals.
  • It has an inpatient rehabilitation unit of 21 beds, which CMS lists apart as a rehabilitation facility.
  • Voluntary non-profit - Private.
Source:

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

Has it been penalized?

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals.
  • Not among the hospitals whose Medicare payments CMS cut under the Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program for fiscal year 2026.
  • 1 deficiency cited in the last three years came from an inspection that included a complaint investigation.
Source:

CMS, Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated yearly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

CMS, QCOR Hospital 2567 statements of deficiencies. Released Oct 20, 2026. Updated monthly.

What do patients say about their care?

  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In CMS’s patient survey, patients rate how well its nurses communicated 3 of 5.
  • 88% of its health care workers got a flu shot (Oct 1, 2024 to Mar 31, 2025).
Source:

CMS, Patient survey (HCAHPS) - Hospital and Timely and Effective Care - Hospital. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Who owns it?

  • Sanford Health owns 100% directly since Jan 19, 2007.
  • 27 owners or officers are people: Mark Allen Lundeen (corporate director); Andrew Munce (managing employee (on the payroll)); Marnie Lynn Ventling-Herrmann (corporate director); Tony Lee Morrison (managing employee (on the payroll)); James Edward Cain (corporate officer); James Edward Cain (corporate director); Michael Charles Wilde (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%); Brent Gerard Teiken (corporate director); Dana James Dykhouse (corporate director); Andrew Stewart North (corporate officer); Andrew Stewart North (corporate director); Eric Lucas Vanden Hull (managing employee (on the payroll)); Stephanie Marie Herseth Sandlin (corporate director); William Joseph Gassen (corporate officer); William Joseph Gassen (corporate director); Paul Aaron Hanson (corporate director); Paul Aaron Hanson (managing employee (on the payroll)); George Joseph Brown (corporate officer); George Joseph Brown (corporate director); Wesley Owen Engbrecht (corporate director); Maureen Patricia Mccausland (corporate director); Thomas Richard Wenzel (corporate director); David Jonathan Shulkin (corporate director); Neil Leslie Gulsvig (corporate director); Kevin Victor Schieffer (corporate director); Lauris Nelson Molbert (corporate director); Nicholas Wayne Olson (managing employee (on the payroll), 0%).
  • CMS’s Provider of Services file records no change of ownership.
  • No private-equity firm among the owners CMS lists.
  • No real-estate investment trust among the owners CMS lists.
Source:

CMS, Hospital All Owners and Hospital Enrollments. Released Sep 29, 2026. Updated monthly.

CMS, Provider of Services File - Hospital & Non-Hospital Facilities. Released Oct 14, 2026. Updated quarterly.

Organisations CMS lists
OrganisationRoleShareSince
SanfordOwns 5% or more through other companies100%Nov 2, 2009
Sanford HealthOwns 5% or more directly100%Jan 19, 2007

How does it compare nearby?

  • Of the 6 hospitals CMS lists in Minnehaha County, 3 have an overall star rating from CMS: 2 rated 5 of 5, 1 rated 4 of 5.
  • CMS rates this one 5 of 5.
Source:

CMS, Hospital General Information. Released Aug 13, 2026. Updated quarterly.

What the record doesn’t say

  • CMS doesn’t publish fines or other penalties for hospitals, so none are shown. The one payment cut CMS publishes for each hospital, under its Hospital-Acquired Condition Reduction Program, is shown where it applies.
  • Only complaints that led to a citation appear; complaints that didn’t aren’t published.
  • Most hospitals are accredited by a private organisation (The Joint Commission, DNV and others) whose routine inspections stand in for the state’s; those reports aren’t public, and QCOR holds only the state’s surveys: no inspection on record here doesn’t mean none took place.
  • QCOR says its hospital inspection data are complete only through September 17, 2026, while it moves to a new system.
  • CMS doesn’t publish staffing levels for hospitals.
  • In its September 2026 release CMS gives no comparison with the national rate for death and readmission rates, though it gives the rates.

Sources

If you believe something here is wrong, a correction starts with the agency whose record this copies: CMS. CMS’s own record is on Care Compare. If Hearth Record copied something wrongly, it will fix it and log the correction publicly, with its date: how corrections work.

Source:

This copy of the record was made on Nov 5, 2026.

From the hospital

The public record above comes first. Anything the hospital adds will appear here, below it, and say who wrote it.

Replies

None. Replies aren’t open yet. When they open, the hospital will be able to answer any finding for free, and the reply will show beside that finding, unedited and dated.

Paid listing

None. Paid listings aren’t open yet. When they open, anything paid for will say “Paid by the hospital”, and paying will never change a finding, a rating or the order of results.

How to read a record

Four things every record does, shown on an example record made up for this guide.

An example record, made up for this guide

An example nursing home

Made up for this guide: no real place is shown

Not fully inspected in over two years (CMS flag)

11 health citations at the latest inspection cycle

The state average is 14.3.

Source:

CMS, State and US Averages and Health Deficiencies. Released Oct 28, 2026. Updated monthly.

From the homeNone yet. Replies and paid listings aren’t open, and when they open they will sit here, below the record.

1 of 4

Every fact names its source.

Who published it, when, and how often it changes sit beside each fact, with a link to the agency’s own file.

Sign in

A free account keeps your watch list, shortlists, comparisons and saved searches on every device, and can email you when something you watch changes. Browsing never needs one.