Assisted Living
Americare Lodges
6870 Schultz Drive Ne, Remer, MN 56672 · Map
Licensed for 10 residents · AMERICARE LODGES INC
Americare Lodges is a state-licensed assisted living community in Remer, Minnesota. It is licensed for 10 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, 10 residents
Assisted Living Facility 423233, current license dated Dec 1, 2025. Licensee AMERICARE LODGES INC.
Nearest emergency room
21.3 miles
Grand Itasca Clinic And Hospital, rated 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Americare Lodges this community | 10 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Vitality Living of Remer | 1.7 mi | 20 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Sugar Brook Villa | 16.5 mi | 12 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Maple Woods Assisted Living | 17.4 mi | 30 | Not published | Active | 5 substantiated |
| Majestic Pines | 21.3 mi | 101 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- December 5, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (December 5, 2024, state report YOT811)
MDH: “On December 3, 2024, through December 5, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed December 5, 2024: 14 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 ensure an evaluation was conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and document review, the licensee failed to ensure an evaluation was conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility. In addition, the licensee failed to develop a staffing plan that included metrics to determine staffing levels to meet the scheduled and unscheduled needs of all residents. This had the potential to affect the current 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 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
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
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 one employee, (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D) with shared equipment. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed by one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B while providing assistance to resident (R4). [...]”
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 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 the required content in common area to include posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near one of two telephones (kitchen) provided by the assisted living facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post the required content in common area to include posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near one of two telephones (kitchen) provided by the assisted living facility. This had the potential to affect five residents, staff and visitors. [...]”
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 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 required content for two of three employees, (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-C, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained required content for two of three employees, (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-C, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D). [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 14
- 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 and post a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and post a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) 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 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 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: “for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) provide smoke alarms outside each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms; (iii) provide smoke [...]”
- 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 maintain the facility's physical
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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, provide required training and drills and. 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 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 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration 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) prepared in writing specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions for two of two residents (R3, R2)
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions for two of two residents (R3, R2) 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees, (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D), followed registered nurse (RN) written instructions and steps of medication administration of a topical ointment for one of one resident, (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees, (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D), followed registered nurse (RN) written instructions and steps of medication administration of a topical ointment for one of one resident, (R4). Further, the licensee failed to ensure medication was given as prescribed for one of two residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
- Tag 1830: 144G.71 Subd. 14 Renewal of prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for one of two residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for one of two residents (R2). 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 an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a [...]”
Rule cited: “Prescriptions must be renewed at least every 12 months or more frequently as indicated by the assessment in subdivision 2. Prescriptions for controlled substances must comply with chapter 152.”
- 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) prepared in writing specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions for one of two residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions for one of two residents (R2). [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- January 28, 2022: report 8OZC11 · 15 correction orders
Details
Survey completed January 28, 2022: 15 correction orders
- 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 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · 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 the contact information for the Mental Health and Development Disabilities.
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 the contact information for the Mental Health and Development Disabilities. This had the potential to affect all eight (8) 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. [...]”
- 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 the required content in common areas to include: posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post the required content in common areas to include: posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility. This had the potential to affect all eight (8) residents, staff and visitors. [...]”
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 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 with all the required content and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently. This had the potential to affect all eight (8) residents, staff and visitors. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a resident record included a discharge summary for one of one discharged resident (R3) with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a resident record included a discharge summary for one of one discharged resident (R3) with record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
Show all 15
- 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 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 eight (8) 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 resident training, evacuation drill frequency, and accurate plans for fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on document review and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required resident training, evacuation drill frequency, and accurate plans for fire safety and evacuation. This had the potential to affect all eight (8) residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 920: 144G.50 Subd. 2 Contract information Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. This had the potential to affect all eight (8) residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) The contract must include: (1) a disclosure of the category of assisted living facility license held by the facility and, if the facility is not an assisted living facility with dementia care, a disclosure that it does not hold an assisted living facility [...]”
- Tag 930: 144G.50 Subd. 2 Contract information Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. This affected all eight (8) residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(d) The contract must include a description of the facility's complaint resolution process available to residents, including the name and contact information of the person representing the facility who is designated to handle and resolve complaints. [...]”
- Tag 950: 144.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident (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 observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident (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 8 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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 Service plan, implementation, and revisions t Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for a resident to include all required content for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed.
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 a resident to include all required content for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. [...]”
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 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure sliding scale insulin dosages were documented after administration, for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure sliding scale insulin dosages were documented after administration, for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
- 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 to include all required content.
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 to include all required content. In addition, the licensee failed to provide complete documentation of the medications sent with the resident for one of one resident (R1) who had an 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 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 the required notice to visitors was posted at the main entry way of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all eight current clients, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure the required notice to visitors was posted at the main entry way of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all eight current clients, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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: no immediate fines.
- 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
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”
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 10 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 AMERICARE LODGES INC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 423233
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-12-01
- Licensed capacity
- 10
- Licensee
- AMERICARE LODGES INC
- County
- Cass County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Desiree Heckman
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.
Staff pay and workplace safety1 federal wage case with violations found
Federal records about how the employer here treats its staff.
Federal wage and hour cases
The Department of Labor checks that staff are paid minimum wage and overtime as the law requires.
- Findings for Sep 1, 2012 to Dec 7, 2013. Violations found: Overtime. Back wages: $4,438 owed to 10 employees. Employer as DOL recorded it: Americare Lodges (Americare Lodges Inc.). Case 1703625.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division enforcement data, loaded Oct 15, 2026. Concluded cases only. The dates are the period in which DOL found violations, not when the case opened or closed. Back wages are what the employer agreed to pay; penalties are what DOL assessed. DOL does not publish a page for each case, so search the dataset by case number.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 21.3 mi, nursing home 21.8 mi, pharmacy 22.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Grand Itasca Clinic And Hospital, Grand Rapids. 21.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- The Emeralds at Grand Rapids LLC, Grand Rapids. 21.8 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Essentia Health Deer River Home Care, Deer River. 22.2 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 22.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56672 as rural (rural area).
- Hospice
- 7 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56672.
St Croix Hospice, office in Grand Rapids, 22.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Polinsky Medical Rehabilitation Center, Duluth. 81.2 miles away, straight line. 3 geriatric medicine doctors 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 relatively 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
- FEMA has identified no high-risk (1% annual chance) flood area in this community. (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire relatively 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 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?
- 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?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
- Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
- For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
- Is the apartment held during a hospital stay, and at what cost?
What we checked12 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 | See above |
| 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 relatively 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 |
| The community’s own website | No plain statements of services found |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Americare Lodges provide?
Americare Lodges is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Remer, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 10 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Americare Lodges?
No. We publish state licensing details for Americare Lodges 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 Americare Lodges 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. Americare Lodges does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Americare Lodges?
Use Americare Lodges's website, americarelodgesinc.com, or visit at 6870 Schultz Drive Ne, Remer, MN 56672.
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