Assisted Living
Alliance Homes
4946 Jackson Street Ne, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · ALLIANCE HOMES CORPORATION
Alliance Homes is a state-licensed assisted living community in Columbia Heights, Minnesota. It is licensed for 4 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
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.
License
Active, 4 residents
Assisted Living Facility 423550, current license dated Dec 1, 2025. Licensee ALLIANCE HOMES CORPORATION.
Nearest emergency room
5.6 miles
North Memorial Health Hospital, rated 1 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alliance Homes this community | 4 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Meraki Home | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Greenstar Care Homes | 0.3 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Terrace Haven Care | 0.3 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Indigo Healthcare Services | 0.4 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- September 25, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 1
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (September 25, 2024, state report GYXN11)
MDH: “On September 23, 2024, through September 25, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed September 25, 2024: 14 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements 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) 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: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, clinical nurse supervisor/assisted living director (CNS/ALD)-A).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, clinical nurse supervisor/assisted living director (CNS/ALD)-A). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid employee, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”
- 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 establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which includes baseline testing for two of two employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, clinical nurse supervisor/assisted living director (CNS/ALD)-A).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which includes baseline testing for two of two employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, clinical nurse supervisor/assisted living director (CNS/ALD)-A). [...]”
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 have a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required components included in Appendix Z and failed to post the EPP prominently.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required components included in Appendix Z and failed to post the EPP prominently. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors during an emergency. [...]”
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 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) 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 smoke alarms that are interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate and keep the facility in compliance with the Minnesota Fire Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that are interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate and keep the facility in compliance with the Minnesota Fire Code. The deficient conditions has the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”
Show all 14
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) 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 maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and the annual training on the fire safety and evacuation plan was not being completed for residents and documented semi-annually for employees.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and the annual training on the fire safety and evacuation plan was not being completed for residents and documented semi-annually for employees. 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. [...]”
- Tag 970: 144G.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 that waived the licensee's liability for the 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 that waived the licensee's liability for the 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 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a background study (BGS) clearance letter for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a background study (BGS) clearance letter for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). 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 1560: 144G.64 (a, b, c) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide in written or electronic form to residents, families, or other persons who requested it, a complete description of the dementia care training program to include person-centered planning and service delivery.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide in written or electronic form to residents, families, or other persons who requested it, a complete description of the dementia care training program to include person-centered planning and service delivery. [...]”
Rule cited: “(5) new employees may satisfy the initial training requirements by producing written proof of previously completed required training within the past 18 months. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for each resident to include all required content for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for each resident to include all required content for one of one resident (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the medication management services that will be provided to the resident. [...]”
- 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 comprehensive 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 interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed comprehensive written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available. [...]”
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 1820: 144G.71 Subd. 13 Prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of two residents (R2) receiving medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of two residents (R2) receiving medication management services. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- April 7, 2025 · report HL355856902M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), an unlicensed staff member, neglected the resident when the AP failed to ensure the resident's safety by checking water temperature prior to providing the resident a foot soak. The resident sustained a burn and required hospitalization.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The resident had neuropathy (nerve damage) from a previous stroke that affected feeling in his feet. The facility failed to assess the resident for foot soak An equal opportunity employer. treatments, failed to obtain provider orders, failed to update the plan of care to include foot soaks, and failed to train staff specifically on how to provide the resident foot soaks. In addition, the facility failed to update the resident's provider the day the foot burn injury occurred and the following day when the resident's foot burn worsened. The resident sustained a partial thickness burn of his left foot and required hospitalization.”
Action taken by facility: “After the incident, staff received training and education on resident safety including checking water temperature using a naked hand or use of a thermometer. The AP is no longer employed by the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed February 18, 2025: 2 correction orders
- Tag 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all the required content for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all the required content for one of one resident (R1). The licensee failed to obtain orders for foot soaks, failed to assess R1 for foot soaks, failed to update the plan of care identifying foot soaks, and failed to train staff specifically on R1's foot soaks. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
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 4 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 ALLIANCE HOMES CORPORATION
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 423550
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-12-01
- Licensed capacity
- 4
- Licensee
- ALLIANCE HOMES CORPORATION
- County
- Anoka County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Nafiisa Dahir
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.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 5.6 mi, nursing home 0.9 mi, pharmacy 0.6 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- North Memorial Health Hospital, Robbinsdale. 5.6 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 1 of 5 stars. Location approximate.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Crest View Lutheran Home, Columbia Heights. 0.9 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- All Homecaring Minnesota, Columbia Heights. 1.0 mile away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- CVS Pharmacy. 0.6 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55421 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita East River Road Dialysis, Fridley, 1.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Center, 2.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc Dialysis - New Brighton, Roseville, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 24 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55421.
Interim Healthcare Of The Twin Cities, Inc., office in Roseville, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Intrepid Usa Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 4.4 miles away, straight line
North Memorial Home Hlth Hospc, office in Robbinsdale, 4.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Steven Lawler, MD, Minneapolis. 4.4 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk very low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: very low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively low, heat wave relatively low, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
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.
- The state recorded a finding in April 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- Who is here at night? Are they awake, or asleep and on call?
- Who covers when the owner is sick, on vacation, or away for the day? Can we meet them?
- Is it one flat rate, or does it rise with care needs?
- Can you help someone who needs two people to move, or a mechanical lift?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
What we checked11 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.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Alliance Homes provide?
Alliance Homes is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Columbia Heights, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Alliance Homes?
No. We publish state licensing details for Alliance Homes 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 Alliance Homes 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. Alliance Homes does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Alliance Homes?
Visit Alliance Homes at 4946 Jackson Street Ne, Columbia Heights, MN 55421.
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