Assisted Living and Memory Care
Cerenity Residence on Humboldt
514 Humboldt Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55107 · Map
Licensed for 115 residents · CERENITY RESIDENCE ON HUMBOLDT
Cerenity Residence on Humboldt is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in St. Paul, Minnesota. It is licensed for 115 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Cerenity Residence on Humboldt says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Nurse on site: 24 hours a day.
The Care Center at Cerenity Humboldt offers Rehabilitation, Hospice, and 24/7 Skilled Nursing care.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Offers hospice care on site or works with hospice providers.
Cerenity Humboldt offers Assisted Living, Memory Care, Skilled Nursing, Rehabilitation and Hospice care services.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Provides transportation.
For individuals who need assistance with regular daily activities such as meals, housekeeping, transportation to appointments and personal care.
(page, checked Oct 12, 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.
License
Active, 115 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422381, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee CERENITY RESIDENCE ON HUMBOLDT.
Nearest emergency room
1.4 miles
Allina United Hospital, rated 3 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cerenity Residence on Humboldt this community | 115 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated | |
| Serendipitous Living | 0.2 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| The Friendship Place | 0.4 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Global Case Mgmt East St Paul | 0.5 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Allied Homes | 0.6 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
State inspection record3 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 30, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 3 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 3 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 30, 2025, state report EFEV11)
MDH: “On July 28, 2025, through July 30, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 30, 2025: 8 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) 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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 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 provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content and provide required training and documentation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content and provide required training and documentation. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H).
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 one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H). Additionally, licensee failed to ensure a non-employee (hair stylist (HS)-K) had a cleared background study before providing services to residents. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on July 28, 2025. [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 8
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7)
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record to include all required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3). [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to correctly label medication after removing from the refrigerator for temperature sensitive medications.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to correctly label medication after removing from the refrigerator for temperature sensitive medications. Additionally, the licensee failed to store prescription medication securely to permit only authorized personnel to have access, and the licensee failed to correctly monitor refrigeratortemperatures for temperature sensitive medications. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”
- 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel followed appropriate infection control practices and failed to ensure a sharps container was replaced when required. [...]”
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: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 31, 2022: report TM9211 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 31, 2022: 10 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D with records reviewed. [...]”
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 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 the required smoke alarms outside the vicinity of sleeping rooms of resident apartments #126 and #336 and failed to provide interconnection of smoke alarms for the one-bedroom resident apartments as required by
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required smoke alarms outside the vicinity of sleeping rooms of resident apartments #126 and #336 and failed to provide interconnection of smoke alarms for the one-bedroom resident apartments as required by Minnesota Statutes, 144G.45, Subd. 2. This has 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 physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, record review, and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation. This has the potential to directly affect the health, safety, and well-being of all residents, visitors, and staff. [...]”
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, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide all required content on the fire safety and evacuation plan.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, record review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide all required content on the fire safety and evacuation plan. This has the potential to directly affect the safety of staff and all residents receiving care. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 10
- Tag 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn 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 facility failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed as required prior to providing direct care to residents for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Training and competency evaluations for all unlicensed personnel must include the following: (1) documentation requirements for all services provided; (2) reports of changes in the resident's condition to the supervisor designated by the facility; (3) [...]”
- Tag 1380: 144G.61 Subd. 2 Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed as required prior to providing direct care to residents for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed as required prior to providing direct care to residents for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) In addition to paragraph (a), training and competency evaluation for unlicensed personnel providing assisted living services must include: (1) observing, reporting, and documenting resident status; (2) basic knowledge of body functioning and changes in [...]”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications for two of two residents (R5 and R4) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration date for time sensitive medications for two of two residents (R5 and R4) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed as required prior to providing direct care to residents for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) with employee records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed as required prior to providing direct care to residents for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) with employee records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “Ordered or prescribed treatments or therapies must be administered by a nurse, physician, or other licensed health professional authorized to perform the treatment or therapy, or may be delegated or assigned to unlicensed personnel by the licensed health [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for two of two residents (R2, R1) who utilized bed rails
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for two of two residents (R2, R1) who utilized bed rails with records reviewed. This resulted in an immediate correction order on March 30, 2022, at 2:55 p.m. [...]”
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.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- October 2, 2024 · report HL304624161M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident to provide appropriate supervision and interventions when the resident was found smoking with supplemental oxygen in use.”
“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. Despite facility staff awareness and the resident's history of smoking with oxygen, the facility failed to implement interventions to prevent the resident from smoking unsafely.”
Action taken by facility: “The resident was educated on the dangers of smoking while using oxygen. The resident's portable oxygen tank was discontinued after the wheelchair caught fire. The resident's assisted living contract was terminated, and the resident was in the process of relocating to a different facility during onsite visit.”
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 September 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 two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- April 29, 2024 · report HL304621340M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), facility staff, neglected a resident when the AP did not respond to a resident's call pendant for two hours. The resident had fallen, cut his head, and required emergency medical attention.”
“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 did not follow facility policy and procedures when he did not carry a pager to receive resident pendant calls during the AP's shift. A resident that was on blood thinners fell, hit his head, and bled for over two hours before receiving staff assistance.”
Action taken by facility: “An internal investigation was completed. The AP was suspended while investigation was underway. Reeducation of all staff was completed during change of shift meetings. Staff assisted resident to clear walking pathways in apartment.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed April 2, 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 reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident 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 for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- June 7, 2022 · report HL30462003M
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- May 2, 2024 · report HL304629285M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), contracted staff, abused a resident when the AP had an altercation with the resident. The resident sustained a right rib fracture.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive. Although there was an altercation between the AP and the resident, the resident and the AP provided conflicting information regarding the cause of the resident's injury. There were no witnesses to the altercation and when later interviewed by a security guard of the facility, the resident did not mention being injured by the AP.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility conducted an internal investigation. The security guard filled out incident report. The AP was removed from the schedule. The facility communicated with the staffing agency. Staff were reeducated during change of shift meetings.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed December 20, 2023: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (3)
- April 15, 2026 · report HL304629042M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “An alleged perpetrator (AP), an agency staff member, neglected a resident when they failed to respond to the resident's pendant call for assistance to the bathroom. The resident fell after she attempted to walk herself to the bathroom. The resident was transported to the emergency department.”
“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. There was not a preponderance of evidence to suggest maltreatment occurred. The AP was responding to another resident emergency at the time the resident fell. Although the resident was evaluated at the emergency department, she returned to the facility a few hours later at her baseline health status.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility educated staff following the incident. The facility received leadership approval for an additional shift from 5:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. to assist with resident cares in the assisted living facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed January 8, 2026: no correction orders issued.
- April 14, 2026 · report HL304627423M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “A facility staff member/alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected the resident when the plan of care was not followed, and the resident fell and sustained a hip fracture.”
“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. Although the resident fell and was hospitalized, there was not a preponderance of evidence to support the fall was caused by the failure of facility staff to provide necessary care or services.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility re-educated staff on the importance of reminding and assisting residents who require the use of durable medical equipment (DME) for walking and transfers, and all resident's service plans in memory care were reviewed and updated on mobility status. In addition, a float shift was added to the morning shift to assist residents in the memory care unit and assisted living.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed December 30, 2025: no correction orders issued.
- October 2, 2024 · report HL304625383M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility failed to provide care and services to prevent recurring hospitalizations for infections and falls.”
“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. Facility staff collaborated with outside agencies and the resident's provider for wound care. In addition, the facility sent the resident to the hospital numerous times for further evaluation when signs and symptoms of infections of the wound were observed. While the resident did have falls, the facility added interventions in attempt to prevent further falls.”
Action taken by facility: “When the resident fell, the resident was sent to the hospital for an evaluation if the resident had injuries or hit his head. In addition, the resident was sent into the hospital multiple times for infections to his foot wounds, pneumonia, and high blood sugars.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed September 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 two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
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”
Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”
Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”
Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”
Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”
Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.
What these terms mean
MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”
“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”
For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).
Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.
MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 115 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 CERENITY RESIDENCE ON HUMBOLDT
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422381
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 115
- Licensee
- CERENITY RESIDENCE ON HUMBOLDT
- County
- Ramsey County
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.
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.
Staff pay and workplace safety1 OSHA inspection, 7 violations cited
Federal records about how the employer here treats its staff.
OSHA workplace safety inspections
OSHA inspects workplaces for staff safety, such as lifting, needles, chemicals and workplace violence. It does not inspect resident care.
- Dec 20, 2016: programmed (planned) inspection, complete (safety). Case closed May 3, 2017. 7 violations cited (6 serious, 1 other). Penalties: $9,100 proposed, $9,100 now. OSHA record. OSHA recorded the employer as 94409 - Cerenity Senior Care DBA Cerenity Residence on Hum.
Details
- Serious: Personal protective equipment (general) (1910.132(a)). Penalty $1,050 proposed, $1,050 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
- Serious: Permit-required confined spaces (1910.146(c)(1)). Penalty $1,750 proposed, $1,750 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017. Contested by the employer.
- Serious: Lockout of equipment during maintenance (1910.147(c)(4)(i)). Penalty $1,750 proposed, $1,750 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
- Serious: Lockout of equipment during maintenance (1910.147(c)(7)(i)). Penalty $1,750 proposed, $1,750 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
- Serious: Medical services and first aid (including eyewash stations) (1910.151(c)). Penalty $1,750 proposed, $1,750 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
- Serious: Cited rule 5205.860. Penalty $1,050 proposed, $1,050 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
- Other than serious: Lockout of equipment during maintenance (1910.147(c)(6)(i)). Penalty $0 proposed, $0 now. To be fixed by Feb 18, 2017.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor OSHA enforcement data, as of Oct 15, 2026, inspections since 2016. Penalties can change while a case is open or contested.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 1.4 mi, nursing home 0.0 mi, pharmacy 1.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Allina United Hospital, Saint Paul. 1.4 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Cerenity Care Center on Humboldt, Saint Paul. 0.0 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Care Plus Home Health Agency Inc, Saint Paul. 2.6 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55107 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita St Paul Dialysis, Saint Paul, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 1 of 5 stars)
Davita St Paul Capitol Dialysis, Saint Paul, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
St Paul Capitol At Home, Saint Paul, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 17 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55107.
Our Lady Of Peace Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 5.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Hospice Of The Midwest, office in Woodbury, 5.5 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Accentcare Fairview Hospice - West, LLC, office in Saint Paul, 6.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 2 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 4.2 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 moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively high, 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 state recorded a finding in October 2024. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- 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?
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 | See above |
| 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 Cerenity Residence on Humboldt provide?
Cerenity Residence on Humboldt is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in St. Paul, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 115 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Cerenity Residence on Humboldt?
No. We publish state licensing details for Cerenity Residence on Humboldt 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 Cerenity Residence on Humboldt 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. Cerenity Residence on Humboldt does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Cerenity Residence on Humboldt?
Use Cerenity Residence on Humboldt's website, cerenityseniorcare.org/cerenity-senior-care-humboldt-st-paul-mn, or visit at 514 Humboldt Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55107.
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