Assisted Living and Memory Care
Ashby Living Center
112 Iverson Avenue, Ashby, MN 56309 · Map
Licensed for 24 residents · ASHBY LIVING CENTER
Ashby Living Center is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Ashby, Minnesota. It is licensed for 24 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
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Ashby Living Center says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Provides transportation.
Weekly transportation to Fergus Falls and Alexandria
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - 3 meals a day.
ALC provides three home cooked meals a day and snacks throughout the day.
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Apartment types named: two-bedroom.
From our spacious one and two bedroom suites to our delicious family-style home-cooked meals to our endless number of activities, we offer everything seniors need to enjoy their most rewarding golden years.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026)
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, 24 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 424299, current license dated Mar 1, 2026. Licensee ASHBY LIVING CENTER.
Nearest emergency room
10.6 miles
Prairie Ridge Hospital And Health Services.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ashby Living Center this community | 24 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Evansville Senior Living | 8.1 mi | 16 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Goodneighbors-Maplewood Manor | 9.8 mi | 29 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Barrett Assisted Living Commun | 13.3 mi | 21 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Brandon's Assisted Living | 13.6 mi | 13 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- April 1, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (April 1, 2025, state report T6TA11)
MDH: “On March 31, 2025, through April 1, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed April 1, 2025: 15 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 the licensee's Direct-Care Staffing Plan was evaluated at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensee's Direct-Care Staffing Plan was evaluated at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility. 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 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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one
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 TB education on hire for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B).
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 TB education on hire for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B). [...]”
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 (EPP) with all the required content and failed to review the missing resident policy quarterly.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content and failed to review the missing resident policy quarterly. 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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one resident, (R2) discharged from the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one resident, (R2) discharged from the facility. [...]”
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 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 provide the 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 the required content and provide the 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. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study (BGS) was submitted and a clearance received for one of one employee (cook (C)-F). This had the potential to affect all 16 residents. [...]”
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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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 one of two employees, clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure orientation to assisted living statutes included all the required content for one of two employees, clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B. [...]”
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 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees providing direct care received at least eight hours of dementia training within 80 hours of start date for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees providing direct care received at least eight hours of dementia training within 80 hours of start date for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed ongoing assessments not to exceed 90-calendar days from the last assessment for three of three residents (R1, R3, R9).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed ongoing assessments not to exceed 90-calendar days from the last assessment for three of three residents (R1, R3, R9). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) was trained by registered nurse (RN) and had demonstrated competency to prepare and give medications for residents having unplanned time away.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) was trained by registered nurse (RN) 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 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 medication were maintained at manufacturer recommended temperatures by failing to monitor and document medication refrigerator temperatures for one of one medication refrigerators.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure refrigerated medication were maintained at manufacturer recommended temperatures by failing to monitor and document medication refrigerator temperatures for one of one medication refrigerators. [...]”
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 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 bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications and failed to monitor for expired medications for one of one
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications and failed to monitor for expired medications for one of one medication storage cart. [...]”
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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document in the resident record the disposition of medications as required for one of one resident (R2) upon discharge.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document in the resident record the disposition of medications as required for one of one resident (R2) upon discharge. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 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 hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- November 22, 2022: report 754Z11 · 9 correction orders
Details
Survey completed November 22, 2022: 9 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 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 included baseline testing and screening for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-A).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on 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 included baseline testing and screening for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-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 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 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 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 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 to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative 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 to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative 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, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a background study clearance letter for one of two employees, (registered nurse (RN)-A) with employee records reviewed.
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 clearance letter for one of two employees, (registered nurse (RN)-A) with employee records reviewed. [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 9
- Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) received orientation to the assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) received orientation to the assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations. [...]”
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 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct-care staff completed the required hours of dementia care training in the required time frame for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct-care staff completed the required hours of dementia care training in the required time frame for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 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 conduct a hazard vulnerability or
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies 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 facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to two of two residents (R2, R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to two of two residents (R2, R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
- 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
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- April 10, 2026 · report HL334479662M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when staff failed to provide supervision for a resident with cognitive impairment. The resident cut off his wander guard (a bracelet designed to prevent him from leaving the building) eloped from the facility and fell. The resident was evaluated in the emergency room for a neck fracture.”
“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 facility failed to assess and implement interventions related to the resident's risk for elopement. The resident eloped from the facility. The resident fell and was found outside a local business by a community member who contacted 911. The resident was sent to the hospital and diagnosed with a neck fracture. Upon return to the facility, nursing staff failed to implement additional interventions to prevent further elopements.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the elopement and reported it to MAARC.”
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 5, 2026: 4 correction orders
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an initial nursing assessment was completed by a Registered Nurse for one of one (R1) residents with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an initial nursing assessment was completed by a Registered Nurse for one of one (R1) residents with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an ongoing resident reassessment to include all areas required on the uniform assessment tool for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an ongoing resident reassessment to include all areas required on the uniform assessment tool for one of one resident (R1) with record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure care and services were
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one residents (R1) who was at risk for elopement. [...]”
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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one residents 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 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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”
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 24 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 ASHBY LIVING CENTER
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 424299
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-03-01
- Licensed capacity
- 24
- Licensee
- ASHBY LIVING CENTER
- County
- Grant County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Lori Risbrudt
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 10.6 mi, nursing home 8.1 mi, pharmacy 19.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Prairie Ridge Hospital And Health Services, Elbow Lake. 10.6 miles away, straight line. Location approximate.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Evansville Care Center, Evansville. 8.1 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Home Care By The Care Campus, Brandon. 13.6 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Thrift White Pharmacy. 19.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56309 as rural (rural area).
- Hospice
- 3 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56309.
- Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Tapestry Telehealth PLLC, Fargo. 69.5 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 relatively moderate; 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
- Area not mapped by FEMA. (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire relatively low, tornado relatively moderate, 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 2026. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- 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?
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 | 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 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 | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Ashby Living Center provide?
Ashby Living Center is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Ashby, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 24 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Ashby Living Center?
No. We publish state licensing details for Ashby Living Center 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 Ashby Living Center 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. Ashby Living Center does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Ashby Living Center?
Use Ashby Living Center's website, ashbylivingcenter.com, or visit at 112 Iverson Avenue, Ashby, MN 56309.
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