Assisted Living and Memory Care

Cannon Falls Assisted Living

900 Main Street West, Cannon Falls, MN 55009 · Map
Licensed for 125 residents · CANNON FALLS ASSISTED LIVING

State license active

Is this your community? Claim this listing

Cannon Falls Assisted Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Cannon Falls, Minnesota. It is licensed for 125 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care

125 residentsLicensed capacity

State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care

$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

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.

Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Care and services

From the community’s website

What Cannon Falls Assisted Living says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.

Provides transportation. Transportation (page, checked Oct 15, 2026)

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

3Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Aug 19, 2026. See the record

License

Active, 125 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422637, current license dated Nov 1, 2025. Licensee CANNON FALLS ASSISTED LIVING.

Nearest emergency room

1.7 miles

Mayo Clinic Health System - Cannon Falls.

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
Cannon Falls Assisted Living this community		125	Not published	Active	3 substantiated
Cannon Country	1.8 mi	10	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Valleyview of Northfield	12.8 mi	42	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Millstream Commons	12.9 mi	50	Not published	Active	1 substantiated
Campus A/l	13.3 mi	22	Not published	Active	1 substantiated

State inspection record3 substantiated

Last evaluation: August 19, 2026
Evaluations on record: 2
Investigations substantiated: 3 kept 7 years
Inconclusive: 0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated: 1 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (August 19, 2026, state report FPV111)

MDH: “On August 17, 2026, through August 19, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”

Survey completed August 19, 2026: 17 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
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: “(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 during blood sugar checks by two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D).
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 during blood sugar checks by two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D). This had the potential to affect all residents receiving blood sugar checks. [...]”
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: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include
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 the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
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 include the required content in a discharge summary for one of one discharged resident (R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to include the required content in a discharge summary for one of one discharged resident (R6). 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 [...]”
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 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”

Show all 17

Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed 90 days for three of four residents (R1, R2, and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed 90 days for three of four residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
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 to reflect the current services provided for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4). [...]”
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 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included all required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4). 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”
Tag 1700: 144G.71 Subd. 2 Provision of medication management services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted a face-to-face medication management assessment to include all required content for two of two residents (R1 and R4) prior to providing medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted a face-to-face medication management assessment to include all required content for two of two residents (R1 and R4) prior to providing medication management services. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident who requests medication management services, the facility shall, prior to providing medication management services, have a registered nurse, licensed health professional, or authorized prescriber under section 151.37 conduct an [...]”
Tag 1710: 144G.71 Subd. 3 Individualized medication monitoring and reas Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted a face-to-face medication management reassessment at least annually for two of two residents (R2 and R3) who received medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted a face-to-face medication management reassessment at least annually for two of two residents (R2 and R3) who received medication management services. [...]”
Rule cited: “A registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or qualified staff delegated the task by a registered nurse must monitor and reassess the resident's medication management services as needed under subdivision 2 when the resident presents with symptoms [...]”
Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for three of three residents (R2, R3, and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for three of three residents (R2, R3, and R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, a registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or qualified staff delegated the task by a registered nurse must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the [...]”
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 per prescriber's orders for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per prescriber's orders for one of one resident (R2). 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 [...]”
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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medications as required for one of one discharged resident (R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medications as required for one of one discharged resident (R6). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
Tag 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for three of four residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for three of four residents (R1, R2, and R3) receiving treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for three of four residents (R1, R2, and R3) receiving treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”
Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) an assessment of safety risks must be performed on and around the property. [...]”

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

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 Physical Environment): $500.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.

Earlier evaluations (1)

May 23, 2024: report XD2111 · 18 correction orders
Details
Survey completed August 15, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required (re-issued) Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure management of NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system used to submit background study (BGS) requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS) affiliated with the licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) 26730 for one of 78 employees (clinical nurse specialist (CNS)-B).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure management of NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system used to submit background study (BGS) requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS) affiliated with the licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) 26730 for one of 78 employees (clinical nurse specialist (CNS)-B). This has 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. [...]”
Survey completed May 23, 2024: 17 correction orders
- 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 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained required documentation of completed competencies and training for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained required documentation of completed competencies and training for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid employee, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”
- 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 ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of a facility risk assessment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of a facility risk assessment. [...]”
  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 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 install smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to install smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
  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 facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding 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 [...]”
Show all 17
- 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 required resident training.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide required resident training. 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 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation 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 provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation for one of one resident (R5) who was hospitalized. [...]”
  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 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure they received a background study (BGS) clearance from NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system use to submit BGS requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS)) in affiliation with the assisted living with dementia care licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) 26730 for one of 70 employees (receptionist (R-G)).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure they received a background study (BGS) clearance from NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system use to submit BGS requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS)) in affiliation with the assisted living with dementia care licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) 26730 for one of 70 employees (receptionist (R-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 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30-days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30-days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing assessments not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last date of assessment for one of five residents (R3).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing assessments not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last date of assessment for one of five residents (R3). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1700: 144G.71 Subd. 2 Provision of medication management services Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a medication management assessment was completed by the registered nurse (RN) to determine what medication management services would be provided and included identification and review in all required areas for three of five residents (R2, R3, R4).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a medication management assessment was completed by the registered nurse (RN) to determine what medication management services would be provided and included identification and review in all required areas for three of five residents (R2, R3, R4). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) For each resident who requests medication management services, the facility shall, prior to providing medication management services, have a registered nurse, licensed health professional, or authorized prescriber under section 151.37 conduct an [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to identify how a resident's medications would be stored, who would monitor medication supplies, and who would reorder medication for six of six residents (R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to identify how a resident's medications would be stored, who would monitor medication supplies, and who would reorder medication for six of six residents (R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7). Further, the licensee failed to follow the resident's individualized medication management plan to ensure resident's prescribed medications and orders were current and accounted for after a provider appointment 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, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for three of five residents (R2, R3, R4).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for three of five residents (R2, R3, R4). [...]”
  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 1830: 144G.71 Subd. 14 Renewal of prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure prescriptions were renewed at least annually, or every 12 months, for one of five residents (R4).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescriptions were renewed at least annually, or every 12 months, for one of five residents (R4). 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 [...]”
  Rule cited: “Prescriptions must be renewed at least every 12 months or more frequently as indicated by the assessment in subdivision 2. Prescriptions for controlled substances must comply with chapter 152.”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled with an opened date and/or prescription label for three of three residents (R2, R4, R8).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled with an opened date and/or prescription label for three of three residents (R2, R4, R8). [...]”
  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 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care (ALFDC) were provided to residents and the residents' legal and designated representatives at the time of move in for two of three dementia care residents (R3, R4). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical or nursing standards for
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical or nursing standards for one of two residents (R5) with siderails. This resulted in an immediate correction order on May 21, 2024. [...]”
  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.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
- Tag 2310 (144g.91 Subd. 4 (a) - Appropriate Care And Services): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,000.00.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

August 27, 2024 · report HL267303603M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when the AP placed an arm around the resident's neck and a hand over the resident's mouth.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
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. The AP stated she placed her left arm across placed the resident's chest and placed her right hand over the resident's mouth two or three times to attempt to stop his yelling.”
Action taken by facility: “Facility suspended the AP, completed an internal investigation then terminated the AP. Retraining on vulnerable adult abuse completed with all facility caregivers.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed August 8, 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 an individual person was responsible 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.”
April 15, 2024 · report HL267308106M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The resident was neglected when the alleged perpetrator (AP) failed to provide timely care during a diabetic emergency. In addition, the resident received more Morphine then prescribed. The resident died.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP was aware the resident had a critically low blood sugar of 29, was unresponsive, and was having seizure activity but failed to implement prescribed orders for injectable glucagon (medication used to treat low blood sugar) for over two hours. In addition, the resident received morphine instead of Ativan to treat seizures. There was no indication the Morphine medication error caused an adverse outcome for the resident. The resident died approximately 7 ½ hours after the low blood sugar was identified.”
Action taken by facility: “After the incident the facility provided re-education to the ULP and facility staff on safe medication administration practices including insulin administration.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed March 4, 2024: 6 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect. The facility was responsible for neglect when they failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services, and interventions as ordered for a unresponsive resident, with seizure activity,who had critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed. The licensee failed to identify interventions regarding R1 using oxygen while smoking cigarettes. This resulted in serious injury when R1 had a mask on his face while smoking with his oxygen on, and started the mask on fire. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of one resident's (R2) receiving medication management services with records reviewed. The licensee failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services and administered insulin when R2 had low blood sugar and had not eaten. R2 became unresponsive, with seizure activity, and had a critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. Harm occurred for R1 when the facility failed to identify R1 had unsafe smoking practices with oxygen on, R1 sustained multiple second degree burns to his face, hands, and legs. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, the facility was responsible for the maltreatment of R1, and and individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment of R2, 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.”
April 15, 2024 · report HL267309045M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when they failed to ensure the resident was safe to smoke. The resident was smoking with oxygen and sustained burns.”
“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 assess the resident to ensure the resident was safe when smoking. The resident was smoking with his oxygen on, and the residents disposable mask started on fire. The resident was transferred to the hospital and diagnosed with multiple second-degree flash burns on his face, fingers, and thigh. The resident required debridement and treatment of his burns.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility responded to the resident, called 911 and had the resident transferred by ambulance for evaluation and treatment of his injuries. The facility reported the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC), investigated the incident. Education was provided to staff to ensure a smoking assessment and education was completed for all residents who smoke per policy.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed March 4, 2024: 6 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect. The facility was responsible for neglect when they failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services, and interventions as ordered for a unresponsive resident, with seizure activity,who had critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed. The licensee failed to identify interventions regarding R1 using oxygen while smoking cigarettes. This resulted in serious injury when R1 had a mask on his face while smoking with his oxygen on, and started the mask on fire. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of one resident's (R2) receiving medication management services with records reviewed. The licensee failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services and administered insulin when R2 had low blood sugar and had not eaten. R2 became unresponsive, with seizure activity, and had a critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. Harm occurred for R1 when the facility failed to identify R1 had unsafe smoking practices with oxygen on, R1 sustained multiple second degree burns to his face, hands, and legs. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, the facility was responsible for the maltreatment of R1, and and individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment of R2, 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.”

Unsubstantiated investigations (1)

April 15, 2024 · report HL267307705M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The resident was neglected when the facility failed to ensure the resident received care, services, and supervision according to the resident's plan of care. The resident fell and sustained multiple fractures, then laid on the floor for 6 hours before staff found her. The resident was transferred to the emergency department (ED) for evaluation and treatment.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. The resident had a fall and was not found for approximately 6 hours. Staff were following the resident individualized plan of care at the time of the incident. The resident received one safety check per shift and was seen earlier that day with no concerns.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility staff checked on the resident, found her on the floor, and called 911 for the resident to be transported to the ED for evaluation and treatment of her injuries.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed March 4, 2024: 6 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) potential concerns of maltreatment neglect for one of three residents (R2) reviewed for neglect. The facility was responsible for neglect when they failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services, and interventions as ordered for a unresponsive resident, with seizure activity,who had critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure individualized abuse prevention plans (IAPP) were completed and/or individualized to ensure resident safety for 3 of 3 residents, (R1, R2, and R3), reviewed. The licensee failed to identify interventions regarding R1 using oxygen while smoking cigarettes. This resulted in serious injury when R1 had a mask on his face while smoking with his oxygen on, and started the mask on fire. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments after the resident had changes in her health condition for one of one residents, (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of one resident's (R2) receiving medication management services with records reviewed. The licensee failed to provide safe accurate medication administration services and administered insulin when R2 had low blood sugar and had not eaten. R2 became unresponsive, with seizure activity, and had a critically low blood sugar of 29. [...]”
  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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide care in accordance with accepted healthcare standards for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. Harm occurred for R1 when the facility failed to identify R1 had unsafe smoking practices with oxygen on, R1 sustained multiple second degree burns to his face, hands, and legs. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure two of three resident(s) reviewed (R1, and R2) were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, the facility was responsible for the maltreatment of R1, and and individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment of R2, 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.”

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”

Level 4: “a violation harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury or death, or a violation that was likely to lead to serious injury 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 125 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 CANNON FALLS ASSISTED LIVING

License type: Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number: 422637
License status: Active
Current license dated: 2025-11-01
Licensed capacity: 125
Licensee: CANNON FALLS ASSISTED LIVING
County: Goodhue County
Administrator/Authorized Agent: Anya Vistman

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 1.7 mi, nursing home 13.2 mi, pharmacy 12.8 mi

Nearest hospital with an emergency room: Mayo Clinic Health System - Cannon Falls, Cannon Falls. 1.7 miles away, straight line.
Nearest Medicare nursing home: Three Links Care Center, Northfield. 13.2 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office: Jb Kummer Enterprises LLC, Farmington. 14.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy: Family Fare Pharmacy. 12.8 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area: USDA classes ZIP code 55009 as rural (rural area).
Dialysis within 15 miles: Davita Northfield At Home, Northfield, 14.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 1 of 5 stars)
Hospice: 10 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55009.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 22.5 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice: Southern Cities Clinic, Faribault. 23.2 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 high; 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 high. By hazard: inland flooding very high, wildfire very low, tornado very high, heat wave relatively low, 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 checked12 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
The community’s own website		See above

Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask

What type of care does Cannon Falls Assisted Living provide?

Cannon Falls Assisted Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Cannon Falls, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 125 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Cannon Falls Assisted Living?

No. We publish state licensing details for Cannon Falls Assisted Living 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 Cannon Falls Assisted Living 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. Cannon Falls Assisted Living does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Cannon Falls Assisted Living?

Use Cannon Falls Assisted Living's website, cannonrivers.com, or visit at 900 Main Street West, Cannon Falls, MN 55009.

Choosing assisted livingOur 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

Other communities in Goodhue County