501 East Front Street, Larimore, ND 58251
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Good Samaritan Society - Larimore
Pros
The place is described as a great place, even though it’s a bit out in the boonies.
The team is wonderful and the family members are described as supportive, with the Good Samaritan Society being recommended.
The staff takes very good care of residents and keeps families informed.
The care in both assisted living and nursing home settings is remarkable, with residents’ needs consistently met.
It is described as a faith-based center of care.
Staff are praised for going above and beyond, including checking on residents even during off-duty hours.
Cons
The facility has terrible staffing and slow response to residents’ needs, with a lack of communication from staff to families and residents.
A nephew stayed there for about a week and could not stand it, eventually being moved to another nursing home.
The place is described as complete crap; not one person there seems to care about the wellbeing of its occupants; care was poor and needs were not listened to; billing is incorrect and information is lost.
The staff are not supported and are not provided with what they need to care for residents; there is one staff member for 15 residents and more office staff than the budget can afford; the place is a joke.
The staff are treated poorly by management.
Review
Good Samaritan Society - Larimore is best suited for families seeking a faith-based, small-town atmosphere and who are prepared to stay actively involved in oversight due to uneven staffing consistency. The rural Larimore setting appeals to those valuing a close-knit community feel and relationships with caregivers who stay for extended periods. When this environment works, residents benefit from a compassionate, relationship-driven approach that aligns with the center’s values. However, potential residents should understand that staffing levels and communication consistency can be uneven, and these factors materially shape daily life here. For families with high daily-care expectations, this is a critical frame to assess before making a commitment.
On the positive side, the strongest recurring theme is personal care from individual staff when they are on the floor. Several reviews praise a caring, professional attitude among caregivers who show up and who keep families informed, especially where administration is engaged. The faith-based culture provides meaningful routines, spiritual support, and a sense of dignity that resonates with family values. There is anecdotal evidence of staff members going above and beyond, staying connected during difficult days. In those moments, care quality can feel exceptionally solid, and families feel reassured by the dedication of a subset of the team.
Yet these positives are undercut by persistent cautions about staffing and communication. The most troubling pattern centers on reports of too few staff for too many residents, leading to slow responses for basic needs like toileting and transfers. Communication gaps between staff and families or residents are repeatedly cited, with miscommunications and billing mistakes appearing in multiple accounts. A few family members describe outright neglect or unaddressed needs, and one account notes a rapid negative change that led to a move to another facility. Taken together, the negative feedback signals real risk in consistency of day-to-day care.
Proponents of the community argue the care can be excellent when the right people are on shift, and the facility’s faith-based ethos fosters a respectful, human-centered environment. The alignment between administration and caregivers in some cases helps stabilize quality and ensures families stay informed. In those favorable periods, the cons become less burdensome because core tasks are handled with attentiveness and residents are treated with warmth. However, such periods appear episodic rather than guaranteed, and the overall track record shows a mismatch between ideals and everyday operations. The critical dynamic is that the positives exist but are inconsistent across shifts and days.
For families evaluating a move, several due-diligence steps matter: insist on current staffing metrics, such as the ratio of aides and LPNs to residents, and request a tour during a typical shift to observe response times firsthand. Schedule conversations with the administrator, the director of nursing, and the activities coordinator to gauge how information is shared and how billing questions are resolved. Ask for recent resident or family references and verify the consistency of care plans across transitions between assisted living and longer-term skilled care if applicable. If rapid response, transparent billing, and reliable daily support are non-negotiables, alternatives with stronger staffing and communication may offer greater peace of mind.
In the end, this community is a conditional fit. It can work well for families who prize a faith-driven environment, are comfortable staying actively engaged, and accept some variability in staffing as part of rural life. For those whose top priorities are steady, responsive care and consistently transparent operations, looking at other options, especially facilities with documented staffing stability, will reduce risk. The decision should hinge on an explicit plan for oversight, a clear understanding of around-the-clock support, and a candid assessment of how often and how well the staff will meet daily needs. If these elements align, Good Samaritan Society - Larimore can be a meaningful home; if not, moving toward alternatives with proven reliability is the prudent path.










Understanding Medicaid Coverage for Assisted Living: A Comprehensive Guide
How and When Medicaid May Cover Assisted Living Costs
A Detailed Exploration of Assisted Living Medicaid Waivers Across the United States

