Lilisity

Assisted Living

Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North

3501 62nd Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · BUTTERFLY BOUND CARE

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North is a state-licensed assisted living community in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. It is licensed for 4 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingCare offered
4 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility
$2,500 to $4,400/moTypical assisted living start in Hennepin County, from 18 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

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.

State inspections

2Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Sep 18, 2024. See the record

License

Active, 4 residents

Assisted Living Facility 423659, current license dated Jan 1, 2026. Licensee BUTTERFLY BOUND CARE.

Nearest emergency room

4.1 miles

North Memorial Health Hospital, rated 1 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.

CommunityDistanceLicensed capacityPublished starting priceLicenseInspection citations
Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North this community4Not publishedActive2 substantiated
Heroic Home Care0.0 mi5Not publishedActiveNo record
Butterfly Bound Care, 6207 Chowen Avenue North0.0 mi4Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Butterfly Bound Care, 6219 Chowen Ave N0.0 mi5Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Butterfly Bound Care, 6225 Chowen Ave North0.0 mi4Not publishedActive0 substantiated
State inspection record2 substantiated
Last evaluation
September 18, 2024
Evaluations on record
1
Investigations substantiated
2 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
1 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (September 18, 2024, state report W8QN11)

MDH: “On September 16, 2024, through September 18, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed September 18, 2024: 13 correction orders

  • Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”

  • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”

    Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”

  • Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, 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 complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).

    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 complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”

    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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”

  • Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”

Show all 13
  • Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that functioned and were interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm caused all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that functioned and were interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm caused all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”

  • Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain 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.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain 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. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”

  • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required training and drills.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required training and drills. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

  • Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”

  • Tag 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 a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for four of seven employees (house manager (HM)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E, ULP-F, ULP-G).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for four of seven employees (house manager (HM)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E, ULP-F, ULP-G). [...]”

    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 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · 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 one employee (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B).

    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 one employee (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B). [...]”

    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 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were 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 beyond-use date of a time-dated drug as well as disposing of expired medications.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were 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 beyond-use date of a time-dated drug as well as disposing of expired medications. This had a potential to affect all residents. [...]”

    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 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) followed appropriate medication administration procedures.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) followed appropriate medication administration procedures. [...]”

    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 [...]”

From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

  • May 30, 2025 · report HL357172281C
    Details

    Survey completed May 30, 2025: 2 correction orders

    • Tag 450: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide services in a person-centered manner.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide services in a person-centered manner. 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 a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has potential [...]”

      Rule cited: “All assisted living facilities shall: (1) distribute to residents the assisted living bill of rights; (2) provide services in a manner that complies with the Nurse Practice Act in sections 148.171 to 148.285; (3) utilize a person-centered planning and service [...]”

    • Tag 485: 144G.41 Subdivision 1.a (a) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure at least three nutritious meals daily, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United Stated Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines, including seasonal fresh fruit and fresh vegetables.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure at least three nutritious meals daily, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United Stated Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines, including seasonal fresh fruit and fresh vegetables. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”

      Rule cited: “All assisted living facilities must offer to provide or make available 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 Agriculture (USDA) [...]”

  • December 30, 2024 · report HL357175004M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The resident was neglected when the facility failed to provide supervision and three unknown males came to the facility and physically assaulted the resident.”

    “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 resident's girlfriend, who was staying at the facility but was not a resident, had a car towed to the facility. Three unknown males who were in a dispute with the resident's girlfriend regarding ownership of the car came to the facility to confront the resident and his girlfriend. The three males physically assaulted the resident. Although the resident required 24-hour staff supervision, there were no staff present at the facility at the time of the assault. The resident's girlfriend called 911. The resident sustained multiple injuries to his right and left shoulder, head, and had a nosebleed. An equal opportunity employer.”

    Action taken by facility: “The facility reported to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center.”

    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 October 16, 2024: 1 correction order

    • 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. 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.”

Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
  • November 6, 2025 · report HL357173782M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) financially exploited the resident by allegedly "skimming" social security payments and making the resident pay cash rent while also collecting reimbursement from other sources.”

    “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was not substantiated.”

    Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: financial exploitation not substantiated.

    MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was not substantiated. The AP was not receiving cash from the resident. The resident had a rep-payee handling his social security payments.”

    Action taken by facility: “No action required.”

    Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

    Survey completed October 21, 2025: no correction orders issued.

What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)

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”

Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”

Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”

Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”

Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.

What these terms mean

MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”

“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”

For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).

Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.

MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 4 residents; larger communities are evaluated and reported on more often, so read counts with size in mind. Source: Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division, data as of September 28, 2026. Always visit in person and ask the community about anything listed here.

License and ownershipActive license, licensee BUTTERFLY BOUND CARE
License type
Assisted Living Facility
License number
423659
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-01-01
Licensed capacity
4
Licensee
BUTTERFLY BOUND CARE
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Doreen Kalema

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 4.1 mi, nursing home 1.4 mi, pharmacy 2.5 mi
Nearest hospital with an emergency room
North Memorial Health Hospital, Robbinsdale. 4.1 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 1 of 5 stars. Location approximate.
Nearest Medicare nursing home
Maranatha Care Center, Brooklyn Center. 1.4 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office
Elizjoseph Healthcare LLC, Brooklyn Center. 0.7 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy
Walgreens. 2.5 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area
USDA classes ZIP code 55429 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
Dialysis within 15 miles
Fresenius Kidney Care Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Center, 1.0 mile away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita East River Road Dialysis, Fridley, 2.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Fkc - Robbinsdale Dialysis, Robbinsdale, 2.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Hospice
22 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55429.
North Memorial Home Hlth Hospc, office in Robbinsdale, 3.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Golden Valley, 5.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 1 of 5 stars)
Grace Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 6.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice
Hennepin Healthcare System Inc, Brooklyn Park. 2.3 miles away, straight line. 2 geriatric medicine doctors 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 low; 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 low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire very low, tornado relatively moderate, 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.

  1. The state recorded a finding in May 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
  2. The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
  3. What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
  4. Who is here at night? Are they awake, or asleep and on call?
  5. Who covers when the owner is sick, on vacation, or away for the day? Can we meet them?
  6. Is it one flat rate, or does it rise with care needs?
  7. Can you help someone who needs two people to move, or a mechanical lift?
  8. How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
  9. What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
  10. What fees are charged at move-in?
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.

SourceData as ofWhat we found
Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection recordsSep 28, 2026See above
U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour casesOct 15, 2026Nothing on record
OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016Oct 15, 2026Nothing on record
FEMA flood mapSee above
USDA wildfire riskApr 15, 2026Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low
FEMA National Risk IndexSee above
CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmaciesSee above
HUD Multifamily Properties - AssistedJul 6, 2026Nothing on record
State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory)Sep 20, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Hospice - General InformationAug 19, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Home Health Care AgenciesMay 27, 2026Nothing on record
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North provide?

Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North?

No. We publish state licensing details for Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North 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 Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North cost?

Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North?

Visit Butterfly Bound Care, 62nd Avenue North at 3501 62nd Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429.

Choosing a small care homeOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

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