Assisted Living
Beltrami Senior Housing
1426 Pamela Court Nw, Bemidji, MN 56601 · Map
Licensed for 14 residents · BELTRAMI SENIOR HOUSING LLC
Beltrami Senior Housing is a state-licensed assisted living community in Bemidji, Minnesota. It is licensed for 14 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, 14 residents
Assisted Living Facility 424967, current license dated Mar 7, 2026. Licensee BELTRAMI SENIOR HOUSING LLC.
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- March 5, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (March 5, 2024, state report 6ZRT11)
MDH: “On March 4, 2024, through March 5, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed March 5, 2024: 4 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 had the potential to affect all residents in the Assisted Living facility. [...]”
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 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 complete a written emergency disaster plan with all required content and failed to post the emergency plan prominently.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to complete a written emergency disaster plan with all required content and failed to post the emergency plan prominently. This had the potential to affect all current residents receiving services under the assisted living license, staff, and visitors to 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 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 electronic records.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure resident records were protected against unauthorized disclosure of electronic records. 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 [...]”
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 2410: 144G.91 Subd. 13 Personal and treatment privacy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure privacy was maintained for one of one resident (R1) observed during medication and treatment administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure privacy was maintained for one of one resident (R1) observed during medication and treatment administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to consideration of their privacy, individuality, and cultural identity as related to their social, religious, and psychological well-being. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- June 29, 2022: report 7KWL11 · 18 correction orders
Details
Survey completed June 29, 2022: 18 correction orders
- Tag 430: 144G.40 Subd. 2 Uniform checklist disclosure of services Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a copy of the uniform checklist disclosure of services (UDALSA) with the required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a copy of the uniform checklist disclosure of services (UDALSA) with the required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must provide to prospective residents: (1) a disclosure of the categories of assisted living licenses available and the category of license held by the facility; (2) a written checklist listing all services permitted under [...]”
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents. This had the potential to affect all ten residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control and current recommendations for COVID-19 regarding screening of visitors and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control and current recommendations for COVID-19 regarding screening of visitors and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). This had the potential to affect all ten residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
Show all 18
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the required plans, training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required plans, training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility may not offer or provide housing or assisted living services to any individual unless it has executed a written contract with the resident. [...]”
- Tag 950: 144.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all ten residents. [...]”
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 1530: 144G.64 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 one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”
- Tag 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 a comprehensive reassessment using the uniform assessment tool for ongoing 90-day assessments for one of one resident (R2) as required with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive reassessment using the uniform assessment tool for ongoing 90-day assessments for one of one resident (R2) as required with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to annually review the individualized medication management plan for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to annually review the individualized medication management plan for one of one resident (R2) with records 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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide documentation in the resident's record regarding the disposition of all medications to include the medication strength, prescription number, and quantity for all medications for one of one discharged resident (R3) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 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 instructions, specified in writing, for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of one resident (R2) who received blood glucose
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure instructions, specified in writing, for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of one resident (R2) who received blood glucose monitoring. [...]”
Rule cited: “Ordered or prescribed treatments or therapies must be administered by a nurse, physician, or other licensed health professional authorized to perform the treatment or therapy, or may be delegated or assigned to unlicensed personnel by the licensed health [...]”
- Tag 2240: 144G.90 Subdivision 1 Assisted living bill of rights; notification Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the current Minnesota Bill of Rights for Assisted Living Residents was provided to the resident and a written acknowledgement received for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the current Minnesota Bill of Rights for Assisted Living Residents was provided to the resident and a written acknowledgement received for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility must provide the resident a written notice of the rights under section 144G.91 before the initiation of services to that resident. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, pattern scope, scope/level letter H · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R1, R2) with bedrails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R1, R2) with bedrails. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 3090: 144.6502, Subd. 8 Notice to Visitors Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) day
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure signage was posted at the main entryway of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all ten residents, staff, and visitors of the licensee.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure signage was posted at the main entryway of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all ten residents, staff, and visitors of the licensee. [...]”
Rule cited: “Subd. 8.Notice to visitors. (a) A facility must post a sign at each facility entrance accessible to visitors that states: "Electronic monitoring devices, including security cameras and audio devices, may be present to record persons and activities." (b) The [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
- Tag 430: 144G.40 Subd. 2 Uniform checklist disclosure of services Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- May 21, 2024 · report HL336019925M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility and individual responsibility Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The resident was neglected when the facility and alleged perpetrator (AP) failed to provide appropriate care, services, and supervision with falls. The resident fell and sustained serious injuries. Then, the AP, a nurse, failed to thoroughly assess the resident for injuries causing a delay in treatment and unnecessary pain and suffering. The resident required surgical repair and hospitalization for her injuries.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility and AP were responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility and individual responsibility Not Substantiated).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility and AP were responsible for the maltreatment. The facility failed to ensure staff had clear direction to assist the resident with ambulation. While ambulating unassisted, the resident fell sustaining a hip fracture and open elbow fracture (a fracture where the end of a broken bone breaks through the skin). The AP was responsible for neglect when she failed to thoroughly assess the resident for injuries after the fall occurred and failed to promptly call 911 despite the resident being unable to bear weight and reporting pain.”
Action taken by facility: “Staff who witnessed the incident, reported it to the nurse in charge. The resident was transferred for evaluation and treatment of her injuries.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed April 23, 2024: 2 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. R1 was neglected when the licensee failed to ensure staff had clear direction to assist R1 with ambulation. While ambulating unassisted, R1 fell sustaining a hip fracture and open elbow fracture (a fracture where the end of a broken bone breaks through the skin). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one of one residents reviewed, (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure one of 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. No plan of correction is required for this tag.”
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 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- June 24, 2025 · report HL336018092C
Details
Survey completed June 24, 2025: no correction orders issued.
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 14 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 BELTRAMI SENIOR HOUSING LLC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 424967
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-03-07
- Licensed capacity
- 14
- Licensee
- BELTRAMI SENIOR HOUSING LLC
- County
- Beltrami County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Lisa Hoff
Source: Minnesota state licensing records (agency listing), retrieved 2026-09-09. Licensing status is a matter of public record; it is not a quality rating.
Administrator/Authorized Agent name from the Minnesota licensing record, as of Sep 9, 2026.
Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs
How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota
- Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)
Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- 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 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 checked7 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 |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Beltrami Senior Housing provide?
Beltrami Senior Housing is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Bemidji, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 14 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Beltrami Senior Housing?
No. We publish state licensing details for Beltrami Senior Housing 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 Beltrami Senior Housing 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. Beltrami Senior Housing does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Beltrami Senior Housing?
Visit Beltrami Senior Housing at 1426 Pamela Court Nw, Bemidji, MN 56601.
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