Assisted Living and Memory Care
Bethesda North Pointe
500 Peterson Parkway, New London, MN 56273 · Map
Licensed for 100 residents · BETHESDA NORTH POINTE
Bethesda North Pointe is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in New London, Minnesota. It is licensed for 100 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, 100 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 425929, current license dated Oct 14, 2025. Licensee BETHESDA NORTH POINTE.
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- August 6, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (August 6, 2025, state report TZKZ11)
MDH: “On August 4, 2025, through August 6, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed August 6, 2025: 7 correction orders
- Tag 130: 144G.12, Subd. 1 Application for Licensure Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to apply for increased capacity to meet the requirements of licensure.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to apply for increased capacity to meet the requirements of licensure. This had the potential to affect all of the licensee's residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each application for an assisted living facility license, including provisional and renewal applications, must include information sufficient to show that the applicant meets the requirements of licensure, including: (1) the business name and legal entity [...]”
- 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
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (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) and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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) and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment 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 comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, their legal representative, and designated representative for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, their legal representative, and designated representative 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 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received at least eight (8) hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received at least eight (8) hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R1) with a consumer side rail.
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 and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R1) with a consumer side rail. [...]”
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.”
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 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- September 7, 2022: report 25FF11 · 8 correction orders
Details
Survey completed September 7, 2022: 8 correction orders
- Tag 230: 144G.18 NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES IN INFORMATION Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to notify the commissioner prior to a change in the facility agent.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to notify the commissioner prior to a change in the facility agent. This practice resulted in a level one violation (a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect 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 residents). [...]”
Rule cited: “A provisional licensee or licensee shall notify the commissioner in writing prior to a change in the manager or authorized agent and within 60 calendar days after any change in the information required in section 144G.12, subdivision 1, paragraph (a), clause [...]”
- 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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
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 COVID-19.
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 COVID-19. [...]”
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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include an individualized review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual, including other vulnerable adults; the
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include an individualized review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual, including other vulnerable adults; the person's risk of abusing other vulnerable adults; and statement of specific measures to be taken to minimize the risk of abuse to the person and other vulnerable adults for six of eight residents (R1, R3, R4, R5, R6, R8) [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- 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 fire safety training and evacuation plans for residents and staff.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide the required fire safety training and evacuation plans for residents and staff. This has 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. [...]”
Show all 8
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) performed reassessments for changes in needs for two of eight residents (R5, R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure all services were provided and implemented as directed in the current service plan for one of eight residents (R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure all services were provided and implemented as directed in the current service plan for one of eight residents (R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure care and services were provided according to a suitable and up-to-date plan and subject to accepted health care and medical standards for one of eight residents (R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure care and services were provided according to a suitable and up-to-date plan and subject to accepted health care and medical standards for one of eight residents (R6) with records reviewed. Staff refused to assist R6 off the floor after they found him lying on the floor in his apartment. R6 laid on the floor for almost an hour before he was able to self-transfer himself to his wheelchair. [...]”
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.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; MDH granted the assisted living license.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,000.00.
- Tag 230: 144G.18 NOTIFICATION OF CHANGES IN INFORMATION Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · 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 100 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 BETHESDA NORTH POINTE
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 425929
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-14
- Licensed capacity
- 100
- Licensee
- BETHESDA NORTH POINTE
- County
- Kandiyohi County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Samuel Quam
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 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 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 Bethesda North Pointe provide?
Bethesda North Pointe is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in New London, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 100 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Bethesda North Pointe?
No. We publish state licensing details for Bethesda North Pointe 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 Bethesda North Pointe 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. Bethesda North Pointe does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Bethesda North Pointe?
Visit Bethesda North Pointe at 500 Peterson Parkway, New London, MN 56273.
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