Lilisity

Assisted Living

Christian Homes

295 12th Street, Newport, MN 55055 · Map
Licensed for 5 residents · CHRISTIAN HOMES

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Christian Homes is a state-licensed assisted living community in Newport, Minnesota. It is licensed for 5 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingCare offered
5 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility
$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.

Care and services

From the community’s website

What Christian Homes 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 Assistance (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.

State inspections

0Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Nov 19, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 5 residents

Assisted Living Facility 425831, current license dated Aug 1, 2026. Licensee CHRISTIAN HOMES.

Nearest emergency room

3.8 miles

M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, rated 4 of 5 stars by CMS.

Side by side with nearby communities

The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.

CommunityDistanceLicensed capacityPublished starting priceLicenseInspection citations
Christian Homes this community5Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Victory Health Care0.7 mi5Not publishedActiveNo record
Trustcare Health Services0.8 mi5Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Cosmo Home Healthcare Services1.2 mi4Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Living Hope Homes Cottage Cres1.4 mi5Not publishedActive0 substantiated
State inspection record0 substantiated
Last evaluation
November 19, 2025
Evaluations on record
2
Investigations substantiated
0 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
1 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (November 19, 2025, state report G6I611)

MDH: “On November 17, 2025, through November 19, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”

Survey completed November 21, 2025: 16 correction orders

  • Tag 460: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a means for residents to request assistance for health and safety needs 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide a means for residents to request assistance for health and safety needs 24 hours a day, seven days a week. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(5) provide a means for residents to request assistance for health and safety needs 24 hours per day, seven days per week; (6) allow residents the ability to furnish and decorate the resident's unit within the terms of the assisted living contract; (7) permit [...]”

  • 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, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”

    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 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 the required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3).

    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 three of three residents (R1, R2, R3). [...]”

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

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

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

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

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

  • 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 · 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: “(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) [...]”

Show all 16
  • 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 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: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

  • Tag 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing with the required statutory language for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing with the required statutory language for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”

  • Tag 970: 144G.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for one of two residents (R1, R2, R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for one of two residents (R1, R2, R3). [...]”

    Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”

  • Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”

  • Tag 1530: 144G.64 (a) (1-2) Training in Dementia, Mental Illness, and De- Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct-care staff completed at least eight hours of initial dementia care training within 80 working hours of the employment start date for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct-care staff completed at least eight hours of initial dementia care training within 80 working hours of the employment start date for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). Additionally, the licensee failed to ensure direct-care staff completed an initial two hours of mental illness and de-escalation training with 80 working hours for two of three employees (ULP-B, ULP-E). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following dementia care, mental illness, and de-escalation training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on dementia topics specified under [...]”

  • Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) 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 include required service plan content for two of three residents (R2, R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to include required service plan content for two of three residents (R2, R3). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death) and was issued at a pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number [...]”

    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 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 ensure the registered nurse reconciled medication orders for three of three residents reviewed (R1, R2, R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse reconciled medication orders for three of three residents reviewed (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 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 prescriber's orders were accurately transcribed for one of three residents (R1).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescriber's orders were accurately transcribed for one of three residents (R1). 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 [...]”

    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 1820: 144G.71 Subd. 13 Prescriptions 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 maintain current signed prescription orders for all medications the licensee was managing for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3). [...]”

    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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review the licensee failed to permit only authorized personnel to have access to medications. 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 a limited [...]”

    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 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to obtain prescriber orders for one of one resident (R1) who received a treatment. 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 a limited [...]”

    Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

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 780 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.

Earlier evaluations (1)
  • November 27, 2023: report WYYF11 · 11 correction orders
    Details

    Survey completed February 7, 2024: 5 correction orders

    • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”

      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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”

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

    • Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide interconnected smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide interconnected smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements. This deficient condition had the potential to 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 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to make the fire safety and evacuation plan readily available, and provide required training and drills.

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

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

    • Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter F
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”

      Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”

    Survey completed November 27, 2023: 6 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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content.

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

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

    • 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 interconnected smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide interconnected smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements. This deficient condition had the potential to 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 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 fire safety and evacuation plans with the required content, and provide the required training and drills.

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

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

    • Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, pattern scope, scope/level letter H · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure that egress windows met the minimum opening size in two occupied resident bedrooms.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure that egress windows met the minimum opening size in two occupied resident bedrooms. This had the potential to directly affect two residents and all staff. [...]”

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

    • Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive nursing assessment not to exceed 90 calendar days from the date of the last review for one of one resident (R1).

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive nursing assessment not to exceed 90 calendar days from the date of the last review for one of one resident (R1). [...]”

      Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”

    Fines assessed by MDH

    • Tag 820 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (g) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $3,000.00

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

    Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.

Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
  • May 21, 2024 · report HL351289825M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility left the resident unsupervised and was found mixing unknown chemicals in the microwave.”

    “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 facility was following the resident's plan of care at the time the incident occurred. The facility staff immediately called 911 and the resident was sent to the hospital for evaluation of health status.”

    Action taken by facility: “Resident was transferred to hospital for evaluation, chemicals and cleaning products placed in locked cabinet and the resident must show staff what he is bringing into the residence.”

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

    Survey completed April 24, 2024: no correction orders issued.

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

Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”

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 5 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 CHRISTIAN HOMES
License type
Assisted Living Facility
License number
425831
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-08-01
Licensed capacity
5
Licensee
CHRISTIAN HOMES
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Edileola Adewola

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 3.8 mi, nursing home 2.9 mi, pharmacy 1.9 mi
Nearest hospital with an emergency room
M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, Woodbury. 3.8 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
Nearest Medicare nursing home
Woodlyn Heights Healthcare Center, Inver Grove Heights. 2.9 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office
Spectrum Community Health Inc, Inver Grove Heights. 1.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy
Walgreens. 1.9 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area
USDA classes ZIP code 55055 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
Dialysis within 15 miles
Davita Woodbury Dialysis, Woodbury, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc - West St Paul Dialysis, West St Paul, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita West St Paul Dialysis Unit, West St Paul, 4.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Hospice
15 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55055.
Hospice Of The Midwest, office in Woodbury, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in Oakdale, 6.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 9.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice
Fairview Clinics, Eagan. 8.5 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 very low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas

Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.

Flood zone
Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
FEMA National Risk Index
Overall: very low. By hazard: inland flooding very low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively moderate, 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.

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

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

Christian Homes is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Newport, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 5 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Christian Homes?

No. We publish state licensing details for Christian Homes 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 Christian Homes 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. Christian Homes does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Christian Homes?

Use Christian Homes's website, lovingcareco.com/nursing-services-in-st-paul-minnesota/assisted-living, or visit at 295 12th Street, Newport, MN 55055.

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

Report a wrong fact

How Lilisity works. The only scores or rankings Lilisity publishes are the Top Communities list and the Excellence Awards, both built from phone-verified resident and family interviews. Communities can pay Lilisity a flat monthly fee to manage their own listing: photos, prices, contact details, and receiving the inquiries families choose to send them. The fee is the same no matter how many families contact them or move in. Senior Living Alliance, which runs Lilisity, offers the same listing to its member communities as part of their membership; members pay SLA for its resident and family interview program. No community pays Lilisity per inquiry, per referral or per move-in. Payment never changes a testimonial, a rating, or the order of search results. The "Nearby Senior Living Alliance communities" box shows member communities only. How we verify testimonials · How we are paid