Nursing Home Neglect and Kansas's Surveyor Shortage
Libby Hastings • November 25, 2025
A recent KAKE News report
highlights how Kansas’s severe shortage of state nursing home inspectors is putting residents at serious risk. Families say long delays in inspections allow neglect to continue unchecked, sometimes with devastating consequences.
One of the most troubling stories comes from Jennifer Hernandez, whose aunt lived at Santa Marta in Olathe. Santa Marta advertises itself as "Luxury Senior Living in Johnson County, KS". A camera Hernandez installed in her aunt’s room recorded her aunt lying on the floor after falling out of bed. Nearly an hour passed before anyone checked on her. In the video, you can see her aunt struggling to get up on her own. Hernandez placed the camera because she was already worried about her aunt’s care.
Sadly, the fall wasn’t the only issue. Her aunt was also found in dirty clothes, had unexplained bruising, and developed an eye infection. Hernandez repeatedly begged the facility to follow her aunt’s care plan, but she was ignored or dismissed.
The family turned to the Long-Term Care Ombudsman’s Office, which can request an investigation by the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS) state surveyors at the resident's request. These investigations can lead to fines, penalties, or corrective action. In Kansas, complaint investigations can take more than a year to start.
This is especially alarming because surveyors are one of the only independent sources of information the public has about nursing home quality. Their reports are often the only transparent, verifiable records families can rely on when choosing a facility. Surveyors are also one of the few entities with the authority to hold nursing homes accountable when care breaks down.
And Kansas is falling far behind. The state has 303 federally certified nursing facilities, which must be inspected at least every 15.9 months, with a national average of 12 months. Kansas is currently averaging 19.9 months between these mandatory inspections.
In Hernandez’s case, an ombudsman even emailed KDADS, warning that staff had tampered with the camera and that the resident was at severe risk. A state inspector never came. Her aunt later fell again, broke her pelvis, and died days later in severe pain.
While the state’s inspection delays are a major part of the problem, the facilities themselves also bear responsibility. Too often, homes put profits over people, cutting corners on staffing, training, and basic care. But it becomes even harder to push for stronger regulations when facilities aren’t being held accountable for meeting the baseline requirements already in place. When the “ceiling” of what a facility does is the bare minimum required by federal and state governments, residents are the ones who suffer.
Kansas’s inspection workforce is stretched far too thin to enforce even the most basic standards. In July, KDADS had 51 surveyor positions — 28 of them empty. The agency later reduced the total positions to 36 and raised salaries, but still has 13 vacancies. That leaves just 23 surveyors responsible for inspecting and investigating more than 300 nursing homes statewide.
Families, advocates, and ombudsmen agree: until Kansas fully staffs and supports its survey team, neglect will go unnoticed, problems will go uncorrected, and residents will remain in danger.
Kansas has announced that it is exiting the Money Follows the Person (MFP) program, citing a drastic reduction in and possible elimination of federal funding. According to the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS), the state had planned to reinstate the program on July 1 after several years of inactivity. Instead, Kansas is now withdrawing from the program altogether. For many Kansans, this decision represents a significant missed opportunity. The MFP program was created to help states rebalance their long-term services and supports systems by making it easier for people to move from institutional settings, such as nursing facilities, back into homes and communities. The program provided funding for critical transition expenses, including home modifications, furniture, bedding, kitchen supplies, and other necessities that help make community living possible. At its core, MFP recognized a simple truth: most people want to live in their own homes and communities, not institutions. Research consistently shows that older adults overwhelmingly prefer to age in place. In an AARP survey, 75 percent of older adults reported wanting to remain in their homes as they age. Yet many feel they will eventually have no choice but to move into a facility because the supports needed to remain at home are unavailable or unaffordable. Programs like MFP help bridge that gap. When people remain in nursing facilities despite being able to live safely in the community, there are consequences, not only for the individual, but for the state as a whole. First, individuals lose autonomy and control over their daily lives. Living in the community allows people to decide when they wake up, what they eat, who they spend time with, and how they participate in their neighborhoods. These choices may seem small, but they are fundamental to dignity and quality of life. Second, unnecessary institutionalization can contribute to social isolation. People living in their own homes can remain connected to friends, family, faith communities, volunteer opportunities, and local activities. Community integration promotes both physical and emotional well-being. Third, keeping people in nursing facilities when they could thrive in the community often comes at a higher cost to the Medicaid system. Home and community-based services are frequently less expensive than institutional care while also aligning with what most people prefer. Helping individuals remain in the least restrictive setting can benefit both taxpayers and the people receiving services. Finally, programs like MFP help remove barriers that prevent people from exercising their right to choose where they receive care. Transitioning from a nursing facility to the community is often not as simple as opening the front door and leaving. Many individuals need assistance securing housing, obtaining household items, modifying their homes for accessibility, or coordinating services. Without dedicated funding and support, these barriers can become insurmountable. Kansas has made progress over the years in expanding home and community-based services, but significant challenges remain. Housing shortages, workforce shortages among direct care workers, and waiting lists for services continue to make community living difficult for many people. The loss of Money Follows the Person means one fewer tool available to help Kansans return home.
2026 legislative wrap-up for long-term care advocates in Kansas.