Assisted Living
Assured Care
9630 Upton Road, Bloomington, MN 55431 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · ASSURED CARE
Assured Care is a state-licensed assisted living community in Bloomington, 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
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Assured Care says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Nurse on site: 24 hours a day.
Nursing homes existed long before assisted living and were born out of the need to provide round the clock medical care for older adults who could not be cared for at home.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Offers diabetes care.
Diabetes Management
(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, 4 residents
Assisted Living Facility 425171, current license dated Apr 1, 2026. Licensee ASSURED CARE.
Nearest emergency room
3.9 miles
M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital, rated 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assured Care this community | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| First Choice Assisted Living I | 0.2 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Ally Group Homes | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Serenity Haven Group Home | 0.4 mi | 3 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Presbyterian Homes of Blooming | 0.5 mi | 111 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- August 20, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (August 20, 2026, state report DP7811)
MDH: “On August 17, 2026, through August 20, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed August 20, 2026: 4 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
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) [...]”
- 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
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 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 780 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 810 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (b-F) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- June 27, 2024: report 5YJN11 · 28 correction orders
Details
Survey completed October 1, 2024: 9 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Not reviewed during this survey.”
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 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for 911 emergency number as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for 911 emergency number as required. This had the potential to affect all 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 (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP), updated annually, with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP), updated annually, with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all 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 700: 144G.43 Subdivision 1 Resident record (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Not reviewed during this survey.”
Rule cited: “(b) Resident records, whether written or electronic, must be protected against loss, tampering, or unauthorized disclosure in compliance with chapter 13 and other applicable relevant federal and state laws. [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2)
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms inside all sleeping rooms and interconnected smoke alarms throughout the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms inside all sleeping rooms and interconnected smoke alarms throughout the facility. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 9
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) 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.
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. 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 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life. This had the potential to directly affect all of the residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Not reviewed during this survey.”
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 (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Not reviewed during this survey.”
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 [...]”
Survey completed June 27, 2024: 19 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 staffing schedule was posted as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the staffing schedule was posted as required. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure the staffing plan was evaluated twice a year to ensure appropriate staffing levels. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: 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 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
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control with proper hand hygiene by two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-J, ULP-G). This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 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 support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for reporting to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) and 911 emergency number as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for reporting to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) and 911 emergency number as required. This had the potential to affect all 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 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 employee records included all required content for three of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, ULP-D, and ULP-J).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records included all required content for three of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, ULP-D, and ULP-J). [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 19
- 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 documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of three employees (unlicensed
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 documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
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 maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP), updated annually, with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP), updated annually, with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all 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 700: 144G.43 Subdivision 1 Resident record Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure resident records were protected against unauthorized disclosure of both electronic and written records.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure resident records were protected against unauthorized disclosure of both electronic and written records. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Resident records, whether written or electronic, must be protected against loss, tampering, or unauthorized disclosure in compliance with chapter 13 and other applicable relevant federal and state laws. [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms inside all sleeping rooms and interconnected smoke alarms throughout the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms inside all sleeping rooms and interconnected smoke alarms throughout the facility. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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) [...]”
- Tag 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2)-(3) 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 portable fire extinguishers and failed to provide adequately rated (size) portable fire extinguishers as required for the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the portable fire extinguishers and failed to provide adequately rated (size) portable fire extinguishers as required for the facility. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) install and maintain portable fire extinguishers in accordance with the State Fire Code; (3) install portable fire extinguishers having a minimum 2-A:10-B:C rating within Group R-3 occupancies, as defined by the State Fire Code, located so that the travel [...]”
- 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 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.
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. 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 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life. This had the potential to directly affect all of the residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- 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 licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property for 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 contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property for two of two residents (R2, R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- 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 a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for four of six unlicensed personnel (ULP-D, ULP-E, ULP-F, and ULP-H).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for four of six unlicensed personnel (ULP-D, ULP-E, ULP-F, and ULP-H). This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. This resulted in an immediate order on June 25, 2024. [...]”
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 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 one of one medication cart was securely locked in substantially constructed compartments and permitted only authorized personnel to have access.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one medication cart was securely locked in substantially constructed compartments and permitted only authorized personnel to have access. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the memory care unit. [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure all medications had a pharmacy label.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure all medications had a pharmacy label. 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 limited number of staff are [...]”
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 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber was obtained for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber was obtained for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services 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 the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for the licensee's two residents (R3, R2) with hospital bed rails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for the licensee's two residents (R3, R2) with hospital bed rails. This resulted in an immediate correction order on June 26, 2024. [...]”
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.”
MDH letters in this report
- January 10, 2025: Notice Of Removal Of Conditional License
- November 20, 2024: Notice Of Conditional License
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is not in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
- Tag 2310 (144g.91 Subd. 4 (a) - Appropriate Care And Services): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $5,000.00.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,500.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
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 ASSURED CARE
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 425171
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-04-01
- Licensed capacity
- 4
- Licensee
- ASSURED CARE
- County
- Hennepin County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Careese Coleman
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 Jul 31, 2023 to Jul 27, 2025. Violations found: Fair Labor Standards Act (pay and hours). Employer as DOL recorded it: Assured Care (Nuline Solutions, Inc.). Case 2006682.
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 3.9 mi, nursing home 0.5 mi, pharmacy 1.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital, Edina. 3.9 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Presbyterian Homes Of Bloomington, Bloomington. 0.5 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Carextra Home Health LLC, Edina. 3.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55431 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Bloomington Dialysis Unit Of Trc, Bloomington, 1.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fmc - Southtown Dialysis, Bloomington, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Richfield Dialysis, Richfield, 3.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 23 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55431.
Caretenders Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 3.2 miles away, straight line
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 4.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, office in Saint Louis Park, 7.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Park Nicollet Clinic, Bloomington. 2.0 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
- 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: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively high, 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 Department of Labor found wage violations here for a period ending July 2025. What changed in how staff are paid?
- 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?
- 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 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 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 |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Assured Care provide?
Assured Care is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Bloomington, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Assured Care?
No. We publish state licensing details for Assured Care 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 Assured Care cost?
Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Assured Care does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Assured Care?
Use Assured Care's website, assuredcaremn.com, or visit at 9630 Upton Road, Bloomington, MN 55431.
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