Assisted Living and Memory Care
Benedict House
3883 19th Avenue Nw, Rochester, MN 55901 · Map
Licensed for 18 residents · BENEDICT HOUSE
Benedict House is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Rochester, Minnesota. It is licensed for 18 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, 18 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422453, current license dated Oct 1, 2025. Licensee BENEDICT HOUSE.
Nearest emergency room
2.9 miles
Mayo Clinic Hospital Rochester, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benedict House this community | 18 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Madonna Towers of Rochester (Assisted Living and Memory Care) | 0.1 mi | 148 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated |
| Quality Care Homes | 0.8 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Quality Living Care 2 | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Second Home Healthcare | 1.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- October 1, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (October 1, 2025, state report 9GIP11)
MDH: “On September 29, 2025, through October 1, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed October 1, 2025: 10 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 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 effective infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to glove use and handwashing by two of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-D, ULP-F) during blood sugar testing, medication administration and personal cares.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to glove use and handwashing by two of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-D, ULP-F) during blood sugar testing, medication administration and personal cares. 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 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 residents' personal health and medical information was kept private.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure residents' personal health and medical information was kept private. This had the potential to affect all 15 residents. [...]”
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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511. This had the potential to affect some residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2-3) Fire protection and physical environment Level 1, pattern scope, scope/level letter B · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the portable fire extinguishers.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the portable fire extinguishers. 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 [...]”
Show all 10
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all 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 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 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 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of 127 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-L, ULP-M) were affiliated with the assisted living license as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of 127 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-L, ULP-M) were affiliated with the assisted living license as required. This had the potential to affect all residents residing within the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered for one of ten residents (R2) receiving medication services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered for one of ten residents (R2) receiving medication services. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
- Tag 2410: 144G.91 Subd. 13 Personal and treatment privacy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide privacy for one of three residents (R1) during a treatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide privacy for one of three residents (R1) during a treatment. 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 [...]”
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.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd.3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd.2. (a) - Fire Protection And PhysicalEnvironment): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 2, 2023: report NPTF11 · 13 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 2, 2023: 13 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, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff, and any visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the staffing schedule was posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff, and any 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: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to glove use and handwashing by one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to glove use and handwashing by one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) during medication administration. [...]”
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).
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). 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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one discharged resident (R3).
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 discharged resident (R3). [...]”
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 13
- Tag 910: 144G.50 Subd. 2 (a-b) Contract information Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2). This had the potential to affect all 16 residents living in the assisted living with dementia care facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The contract must include in a conspicuous place and manner on the contract the legal name and the health facility identification of the facility. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
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 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 one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services. [...]”
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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised and signed by the resident or resident representative to reflect the current services provided for two of two residents (R1, R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised and signed by the resident or resident representative to reflect the current services provided for two of two residents (R1, R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individualized medication management plan included all required content for one of two residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individualized medication management plan included all required content for one of two residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the medication management services that will be provided to the resident. [...]”
- Tag 1820: 144G.71 Subd. 13 Prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure current written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for all medications the provider managed for one of two residents (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure current written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for all medications the provider managed for one of two residents (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”
- 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 label a time sensitive medication with an opened date for one of two residents (R2) and failed to ensure stored medications were not expired for one of four residents (R5) with medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to label a time sensitive medication with an opened date for one of two residents (R2) and failed to ensure stored medications were not expired for one of four residents (R5) with medication administration. [...]”
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 2180: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure behavioral symptoms were identified and were addressed on the care plan for one of two residents (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(e) Behavioral symptoms that negatively impact the resident and others in the assisted living facility with dementia care must be evaluated and included on the service or care plan. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
Level 1: “a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect health or safety”
Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”
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 18 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 BENEDICT HOUSE
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422453
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-01
- Licensed capacity
- 18
- Licensee
- BENEDICT HOUSE
- County
- Olmsted County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Penelope Viggiano
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 2.9 mi, nursing home 0.1 mi, pharmacy 0.5 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Mayo Clinic Hospital Rochester, Rochester. 2.9 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Madonna Towers of Rochester INC, Rochester. 0.1 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- International Quality Homecare, Rochester. 1.0 mile away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- CVS Pharmacy. 0.5 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55901 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Mayo Clinic Dialysis St Marys, Rochester, 2.9 miles away, straight line
Mayo Dialysis Rochester - Northeast, Rochester, 3.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Mayo Dialysis Rochester Methodist Hosp, Rochester, 3.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 8 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55901.
Crown Capital Strategies, LLC, office in Rochester, 1.5 miles away, straight line
Mayo Clinic Hospice, office in Rochester, 1.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Rochester, 2.9 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 1 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester. 0.8 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 moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers 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?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
What we checked11 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Benedict House provide?
Benedict House is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Rochester, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 18 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Benedict House?
No. We publish state licensing details for Benedict House 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 Benedict House 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. Benedict House does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Benedict House?
Visit Benedict House at 3883 19th Avenue Nw, Rochester, MN 55901.
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