Boden Senior Living - Maplewood

Last evaluation

September 3, 2025

Evaluations on record

2

Investigations substantiated

7 kept 7 years

Inconclusive

1 kept 4 years

Unsubstantiated

2 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (September 3, 2025, state report BPC111)

MDH: “On September 2, 2025, through September 3, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a change of ownership (CHOW) survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed September 3, 2025: 9 correction orders

• Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program 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 establish and maintain an infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents, employees, 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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) containing required assessment content was completed on admission for one of four residents (R4).

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) containing required assessment content was completed on admission for one of four residents (R4). [...]”

  Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”

• 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 ensure an employee's TB test chest Xray (CXR) was completed within 90 days of a documented positive Mantoux skin test or blood test and a symptom screen at the time of hire for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an employee's TB test chest Xray (CXR) was completed within 90 days of a documented positive Mantoux skin test or blood test and a symptom screen at the time of hire for one of two 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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
  Details

  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with Minnesota State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules chapter 7511.

  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with Minnesota State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules chapter 7511. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”

  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, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Seven (7)
  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 [...]”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.

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.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

• March 25, 2024 · report HL344268525M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident eloped from the facility and staff were unaware the resident was missing.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”

  “The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. Facility staff were aware of the resident's history and risk for elopement and failed to develop interventions to ensure the resident's safety. The resident eloped from the facility on two separate occasions.”

  Action taken by facility: “None.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed January 19, 2024: 3 correction orders

  • Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan was implemented for one of one resident (R1).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan was implemented for one of one resident (R1). The licensee failed to document that safety checks were completed. The resident was found on the floor after an unwitnessed fall and was admitted to a local hospital. [...]”

    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, [...]”

  • Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Two (2) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards related to supervision and safety for one of one resident (R2).

    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 related to supervision and safety for one of one resident (R2). The resident was identified as an elopement risk and eloped from the facility twice over the span of one month. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”

  • Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of five resident(s) reviewed (R2) was free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of five resident(s) reviewed (R2) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”

    Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”

• March 5, 2024 · report HL344261683M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused a resident when the AP restrained the resident's arms which caused bruising and skin tears.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”

  “The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility failed to provide interventions for staff to use with a combative resident, so staff resorted to restraining the resident's arms when providing incontinence cares. The facility had several recommended interventions which they did not communicate with the staff via the service plan.”

  Action taken by facility: “The facility changed the resident's services to include assistance of two staff for toileting. The facility re-educated the AP and staff involved in the incident on recommended interventions for the resident.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed February 14, 2024: 3 correction orders

  • Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Two (2) Days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) reviewed received a Department of Human Services (DHS) clearance on their background study prior to providing direct contact services or access to residents.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) reviewed received a Department of Human Services (DHS) clearance on their background study prior to providing direct contact services or access to residents. This had the potential to affect all 45 residents of 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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) Days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to revise the service plan to include behavior interventions and failed to ensure staff used recommended behavior interventions for one of one resident (R1) reviewed for maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to revise the service plan to include behavior interventions and failed to ensure staff used recommended behavior interventions for one of one resident (R1) reviewed for maltreatment. Harm occurred during a behavioral episode, when staff restrained R1's arms while changing R1's incontinence brief causing bruises and two large skin tears. [...]”

    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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”

    Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”

• July 19, 2023 · report HL344265383M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), facility staff, abused resident #1 (R1), when the AP restrained R1's arms and hands to prevent the resident from moving. The AP abused resident #2 (R2) when the AP yelled at the resident resulting in R2 being fearful of the AP.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”

  “The AP was responsible for the maltreatment for R1 and R2.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (individual responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment for R1 and R2. The AP was observed by three witnesses restraining R1's hands and wrists to prevent the resident's movement during medication administration. The AP abused R2 when the AP failed to assist R2 according to the residents' individualized needs. The AP yelled at R2, pointed her finger in R2's face, and did not acknowledge R2's cries and requests for the AP to leave the resident's room. An equal opportunity employer.”

  Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and ensured all staff were trained on reporting maltreatment.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed May 16, 2023: 3 correction orders

  • Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

    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 two of two residents, R1 and R2, were free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of two residents, R1 and R2, were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”

    Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”

  • Tag 3000: 626.557 Subd. 3 Timing of report 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”

• July 19, 2023 · report HL344266526M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), facility staff, abused resident #1 (R1), when the AP restrained R1's arms and hands to prevent the resident from moving. The AP abused resident #2 (R2) when the AP yelled at the resident resulting in R2 being fearful of the AP.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”

  “The AP was responsible for the maltreatment of R1 and R2.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (individual responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment of R1 and R2. The AP was observed by three witnesses restraining R1's hands and wrists to prevent the resident's movement during medication administration. An equal opportunity employer. The AP abused R2 when the AP failed to assist R2 according to the residents' individualized needs. The AP yelled at R2, pointed her finger in R2's face, and did not acknowledge R2's cries and requests for the AP to leave the resident's room.”

  Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and ensured all staff were trained on reporting maltreatment.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed May 16, 2023: 3 correction orders

  • Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

    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 two of two residents, R1 and R2, were free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure two of two residents, R1 and R2, were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”

    Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”

  • Tag 3000: 626.557 Subd. 3 Timing of report 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records 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) an allegation of abuse for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”

• July 15, 2022 · report HL34426005M
• July 12, 2022 · report HL34426001M
• May 13, 2022 · report HL34426009M

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.

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 66 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.