Lilisity

Assisted Living

Ageless Care Incorporated

702 7th Street Sw, Roseau, MN 56751 · Map
Licensed for 26 residents · AGELESS CARE INCORPORATED

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Ageless Care Incorporated is a state-licensed assisted living community in Roseau, Minnesota. It is licensed for 26 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingCare offered
26 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility
$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

Assisted Living in Minnesota typically starts at $2,200 to $4,800 a month. Based on 74 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Lilisity’s independent report

What the public record shows

Gathered by Lilisity from state and federal sources. Communities can’t edit this part of the page.

State inspections

0Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Aug 8, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 26 residents

Assisted Living Facility 425370, current license dated May 31, 2026. Licensee AGELESS CARE INCORPORATED.

State inspection record0 substantiated
Last evaluation
August 8, 2025
Evaluations on record
2
Investigations substantiated
0 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
0 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (August 8, 2025, state report Z4DX11)

MDH: “On August 4, 2025, through August 8, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”

Survey completed August 8, 2025: 14 correction orders

  • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”

  • Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) during medication administration.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) during medication administration. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed to disinfect shared reusable resident equipment for one of one employee (ULP)-D. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”

  • Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 (a) Staff records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-I.)

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-I.) This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid staff member, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”

  • Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”

  • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content, make the plan readily available, provide required training and drills.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content, make the plan readily available, provide required training and drills. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

Show all 14
  • Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
    Details

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to obtain a cleared Department of Human Services (DHS) background study, affiliated to the licensee, for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H). This had the potential to affect all residents living within the facility. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”

  • Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual had begun working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual had begun working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”

  • Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees performing direct care services completed the required annual training for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-E).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees performing direct care services completed the required annual training for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-E). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”

  • Tag 1530: 144G.64 (a) (1-2) Training in Dementia, Mental Illness, and De- Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required two hours of initial training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for four of four employees (registered nurse (RN)-E, (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-H, ULP-I).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required two hours of initial training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for four of four employees (registered nurse (RN)-E, (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-H, ULP-I). This had the potential to affect all residents and staff. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following dementia care, mental illness, and de-escalation training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on dementia topics specified under [...]”

  • Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for one of two residents (R2).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for one of two residents (R2). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”

  • Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure refrigerated medications were maintained at manufacturer's

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure refrigerated medications were maintained at manufacturer's recommended temperatures by failing to monitor and document resident's personal medication refrigerator temperatures. [...]”

    Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”

  • Tag 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of two residents (R3) who received treatment and therapy services.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of two residents (R3) who received treatment and therapy services. [...]”

    Rule cited: “Ordered or prescribed treatments or therapies must be administered by a nurse, physician, or other licensed health professional authorized to perform the treatment or therapy, or may be delegated or assigned to unlicensed personnel by the licensed health [...]”

  • Tag 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a resident treatment plan was followed and any follow up procedure was provided to meet the resident's needs for one of one resident (R2) who received daily blood pressure monitoring.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a resident treatment plan was followed and any follow up procedure was provided to meet the resident's needs for one of one resident (R2) who received daily blood pressure monitoring. [...]”

    Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”

  • Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure current written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of two residents (R2) who received treatment services.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure current written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of two residents (R2) who received treatment services. [...]”

    Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included

Fines assessed by MDH

  • Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd.2. (a) - Fire Protection And PhysicalEnvironment): $500.00
  • Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision1 - BackgroundStudiesRequired): $1,000.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.

Earlier evaluations (1)
  • August 23, 2022: report J12I11 · 40 correction orders
    Details

    Survey completed November 18, 2022: 20 correction orders

    • Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”

    • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”

      Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”

    • Tag 485: 144G.41 Subd 1. (13) (i) (A) and (C) Minimum Requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter C
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”

    • Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”

    • Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment (re-issued) scope/level letter C
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”

    Show all 20
    • Tag 580: 144G.42 Subd. 2 Quality management (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “The facility shall engage in quality management appropriate to the size of the facility and relevant to the type of services provided. [...]”

    • Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”

    • Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”

    • Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”

    • Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”

    • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

    • Tag 950: 144.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”

    • Tag 970: 144.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited (re-issued) scope/level letter C
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”

    • Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation (re-issued) scope/level letter E
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”

    • Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED (re-issued) scope/level letter E
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”

    • Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”

    • Tag 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”

    • Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”

    • Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services (re-issued) scope/level letter D
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

    • Tag 3090: 144.6502, Subd. 8 Notice to Visitors (re-issued) scope/level letter C
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action is required.”

      Rule cited: “Subd. 8.Notice to visitors. (a) A facility must post a sign at each facility entrance accessible to visitors that states: "Electronic monitoring devices, including security cameras and audio devices, may be present to record persons and activities." (b) The [...]”

    Survey completed August 23, 2022: 20 correction orders

    • Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents; and failed to ensure the staffing schedule was posted as required.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents; and failed to ensure the staffing schedule was posted as required. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”

    • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”

      Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”

    • Tag 485: 144G.41 Subd 1. (13) (i) (A) and (C) Minimum Requirements Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post a menu a week in advance that was made available to all residents and failed to offer meal substitutions of similar nutritional value.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to post a menu a week in advance that was made available to all residents and failed to offer meal substitutions of similar nutritional value. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”

    • Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control and current recommendations for COVID-19 regarding wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). This had the potential to affect all 19 residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”

    • Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure, as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) as required.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure, as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) as required. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

      Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”

    Show all 20
    • Tag 580: 144G.42 Subd. 2 Quality management Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to engage in and maintain documentation of quality management activity appropriate to the size and relevant to the type of services provided by the assisted living.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to engage in and maintain documentation of quality management activity appropriate to the size and relevant to the type of services provided by the assisted living. This had the potential to affect all 19 residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”

      Rule cited: “The facility shall engage in quality management appropriate to the size of the facility and relevant to the type of services provided. [...]”

    • Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post required content in the common area to include posting the 911 emergency number and failed to post the reporting number for the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) to report suspected maltreatment of a vulnerable adult under section 626.557

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post required content in the common area to include posting the 911 emergency number and failed to post the reporting number for the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) to report suspected maltreatment of a vulnerable adult under section 626.557 This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and [...]”

      Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”

    • Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of a facility risk assessment and implementation of a TB infection control plan.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of a facility risk assessment and implementation of a TB infection control plan. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”

    • Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”

    • Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”

    • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the required plans, employee training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required plans, employee training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

    • Tag 950: 144.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident's (R1) assisted living contract included a notice with the required verbiage for the residents to identify a designated representative.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident's (R1) assisted living contract included a notice with the required verbiage for the residents to identify a designated representative. This had the potential to affect all 17 residents who received services at the facility. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”

    • Tag 970: 144.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”

      Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”

    • Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure orientation to assisted living statutes included all the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E), with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure orientation to assisted living statutes included all the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E), with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”

    • Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”

    • Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large [...]”

      Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”

    • Tag 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) were trained and had demonstrated competency to prepare and give medications for residents having unplanned time away. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”

    • Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”

    • Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to the acceptable health care medical or nursing standards to ensure safe storage of oxygen.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to the acceptable health care medical or nursing standards to ensure safe storage of oxygen. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

    • Tag 3090: 144.6502, Subd. 8 Notice to Visitors Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure signage was posted at the main entryway of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all 19 residents, staff, and visitors of the licensee.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure signage was posted at the main entryway of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all 19 residents, staff, and visitors of the licensee. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Subd. 8.Notice to visitors. (a) A facility must post a sign at each facility entrance accessible to visitors that states: "Electronic monitoring devices, including security cameras and audio devices, may be present to record persons and activities." (b) The [...]”

    From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)

Level 1: “a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect health or safety”

Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”

Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”

Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”

Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”

Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”

Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.

What these terms mean

MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”

“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”

For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).

Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.

MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 26 residents; larger communities are evaluated and reported on more often, so read counts with size in mind. Source: Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division, data as of September 28, 2026. Always visit in person and ask the community about anything listed here.

License and ownershipActive license, licensee AGELESS CARE INCORPORATED
License type
Assisted Living Facility
License number
425370
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-05-31
Licensed capacity
26
Licensee
AGELESS CARE INCORPORATED
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Shawny Elyk-Prevost

Source: Minnesota state licensing records (agency listing), retrieved 2026-09-09. Licensing status is a matter of public record; it is not a quality rating.

Administrator/Authorized Agent name from the Minnesota licensing record, as of Sep 9, 2026.

Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs

How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota

  • Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)

Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.

Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record

Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.

  1. The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
  2. What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
  3. How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
  4. What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
  5. What fees are charged at move-in?
  6. How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
  7. How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
  8. Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
  9. For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
  10. Is the apartment held during a hospital stay, and at what cost?
What we checked8 public sources we searched, with dates

Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.

SourceData as ofWhat we found
Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection recordsSep 28, 2026See above
U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour casesOct 15, 2026Nothing on record
OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016Oct 15, 2026Nothing on record
HUD Multifamily Properties - AssistedJul 6, 2026Nothing on record
State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory)Sep 20, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Hospice - General InformationAug 19, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Home Health Care AgenciesMay 27, 2026Nothing on record
The community’s own websiteNo plain statements of services found
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Ageless Care Incorporated provide?

Ageless Care Incorporated is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Roseau, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 26 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Ageless Care Incorporated?

No. We publish state licensing details for Ageless Care Incorporated but no score, rating, or ranking. Only communities on the Top Communities list or with a Senior Living Alliance Excellence Award, both based on phone-verified resident and family interviews, are ranked.

How much does Ageless Care Incorporated cost?

Assisted Living in Minnesota typically starts at $2,200 to $4,800 a month. Based on 74 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Ageless Care Incorporated does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Ageless Care Incorporated?

Use Ageless Care Incorporated's website, agelesscareinc.com, or visit at 702 7th Street Sw, Roseau, MN 56751.

Choosing assisted livingOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

How Lilisity works. The only scores or rankings Lilisity publishes are the Top Communities list and the Excellence Awards, both built from phone-verified resident and family interviews. Communities can pay Lilisity a flat monthly fee to manage their own listing: photos, prices, contact details, and receiving the inquiries families choose to send them. The fee is the same no matter how many families contact them or move in. Senior Living Alliance, which runs Lilisity, offers the same listing to its member communities as part of their membership; members pay SLA for its resident and family interview program. No community pays Lilisity per inquiry, per referral or per move-in. Payment never changes a testimonial, a rating, or the order of search results. The "Nearby Senior Living Alliance communities" box shows member communities only. How we verify testimonials · How we are paid