Assisted Living and Memory Care
Cornerstone Residence of Fosst
115 1st Street East, Fosston, MN 56542 · Map
Licensed for 41 residents · CORNERSTONE RESIDENCE OF FOSSTON
Cornerstone Residence of Fosst is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Fosston, Minnesota. It is licensed for 41 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
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, 41 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 423364, current license dated Dec 1, 2025. Licensee CORNERSTONE RESIDENCE OF FOSSTON.
Nearest emergency room
0.6 miles
Essentia Health Fosston.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cornerstone Residence of Fosst this community | 41 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Bethany Assisted Living | 0.1 mi | 28 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Prairie Pines Community | 0.8 mi | 25 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Poplar Meadows of Mcintosh | 7.2 mi | 30 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Cornerstone Residence of Bagle | 16.4 mi | 39 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- February 19, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 3 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (February 19, 2026, state report LVSO11)
MDH: “On May 7, 2026, through May 8, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a follow-up survey for the above provider to follow-up on orders issued pursuant to a survey completed on February 19, 2026.”
Survey completed May 8, 2026: 7 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
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 (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
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, record review, and interview, 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:”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
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) scope/level letter F
Details
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
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 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy (re-issued) scope/level letter E
Details
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 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
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 [...]”
Survey completed February 19, 2026: 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, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is 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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) 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, record review, and interview, 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:”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) 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, record review, and interview, 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) [...]”
- 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, record review, and interview, 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 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 current employee records contained all the required content to include a current background study clearance letter for one of eight employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a current background study clearance letter for one of eight employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I). This had the potential to affect all residents living 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. [...]”
Show all 8
- 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 orders for one of eight residents (R2) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per prescriber orders for one of eight residents (R2) observed during medication administration. [...]”
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 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for two of three residents (R3, R6) receiving treatment management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for two of three residents (R3, R6) receiving treatment management services. [...]”
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 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the steps of the medication administration process was followed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) observed administering medications.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the steps of the medication administration process was followed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) observed administering medications. [...]”
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 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 21, 2023: report YBVN11 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 21, 2023: 10 correction orders
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed for two of two of residents (R7, R12).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure infection control standards were followed for two of two of residents (R7, R12). 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 [...]”
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 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) 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 have locks, on two of the emergency exit doors in the memory care unit, that release upon
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to have locks, on two of the emergency exit doors in the memory care unit, that release upon a power outage and when fire alarms are activated. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 970: 144G.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · 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 facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.
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 facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- 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 licensed assisted living director/clinical nurse supervisor (LALD/CNS-A) conducted a medication management reassessment with a change in condition for one of three residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensed assisted living director/clinical nurse supervisor (LALD/CNS-A) conducted a medication management reassessment with a change in condition for one of three residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “The assisted living facility must monitor and reassess the resident's medication management services as needed under subdivision 2 when the resident presents with symptoms or other issues that may be medication-related and, at a minimum, annually.”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication 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, the licensee failed to ensure the pill count could be verified by the unlicensed personnel (ULP) with medication administration of one of three residents (R3); failed to ensure medications were setup per manufacturer's instructions for one of two resident (R4); and failed to ensure the pill count was transcribed accurately on the electronic medication administration record (EMAR) for one of three residents (R9) who received medication [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 10
- 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 ensure medications were stored according to manufacturer's recommended temperature.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored according to manufacturer's recommended temperature. 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 [...]”
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 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 five residents (R3, R6) and failed to monitor for expired medications for one of five residents (R8).
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 five residents (R3, R6) and failed to monitor for expired medications for one of five residents (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 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 plan to include all required content for two of three residents (R3, R4) who had treatments managed by the facility.
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 two of three residents (R3, R4) who had treatments managed by the facility. [...]”
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 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure treatment or therapies were administered as directed, or to document the reason they were not and any follow up procedures that were provided to meet the resident's needs for one of one resident (R4) with blood glucose monitoring managed by the provider.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure treatment or therapies were administered as directed, or to document the reason they were not and any follow up procedures that were provided to meet the resident's needs for one of one resident (R4) with blood glucose monitoring managed by the provider. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”
- Tag 2350: 144G.91 Subd. 7 Courteous treatment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure three of three residents (R10, R11, R4) were treated with dignity
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure three of three residents (R10, R11, R4) were treated with dignity and respect when unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C administered treatments to R10, R11 and R4 in a public setting. [...]”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be treated with courtesy and respect, and to have the resident's property treated with respect”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 5, 2025 · report HL303606405M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), a licensed practical nurse (LPN) at the facility, failed to change the resident's catheter as ordered. The AP/LPN documented she had changed it, but a facility investigation indicated the AP/LPN never entered the resident's room. The resident was hospitalized with a urinary tract infection (UTI) and sepsis.”
“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 AP was responsible for completing catheter changes for the resident but failed to do so. However, facility staff failed to report and take action on observed changes to the condition of the catheter, including after mold was observed in the collection bag. The resident was hospitalized for a septic UTI due to a catheter associated infection and hospital paperwork indicated the catheter did not "appear to have been changed in a significant amount of time."”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and made a MAARC report. The AP/LPN was terminated. The facility made changes to its internal policies and procedures related to catheter care.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed November 27, 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 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
Unsubstantiated investigations (3)
- July 30, 2026 · report HL303602781M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident fell multiple times over a 24-hour period and was sent to the hospital. The resident was found to have to be unkempt with dried feces on his skin and clothing when he arrived at the hospital. The resident had had several areas covered in dried feces and multiple areas of skin breakdown.”
“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. While it was true the resident had four falls in a 16-hour period of time, the facility transferred the resident to the emergency room where it was found he was septic from an infection. Regarding dried feces, the emergency room records did not corroborate this allegation. The investigation did identify a staffing concern, which was addressed with a correction order (see Action taken by the Minnesota Department of Health below).”
Action taken by facility: “No action taken.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed April 27, 2026: 1 correction order
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure sufficient staffing to meet the needs of three of three residents (R1, R2, R3) who required a two-person assist after falling.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure sufficient staffing to meet the needs of three of three residents (R1, R2, R3) who required a two-person assist after falling. R1 had three falls which required emergency medical services (EMS) to respond to the facility to provide lift assistance as only one staff member was working and able to respond. R2 and R3 also had falls which required EMS response to get them off the floor. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days
- July 23, 2026 · report HL303603466M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident had an unexplained open wound/injury to a toe, resulting in an infection and amputation.”
“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 chronic condition of a hammer toe (a deformity where a toe bends or curls downward at the middle joint), resulting in a blood blister, then a callus, and eventually into an amputation. The facility assessed the toe and coordinated care with the resident's provider and podiatrist.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reported the change of condition to the medical provider.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed June 30, 2026: no correction orders issued.
- June 21, 2024 · report HL303609426M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when staff failed to administer the resident's medications according to physician orders and in accordance with the resident's service agreement. The resident was given another resident's medications, which included a medication to manage blood sugar levels. The next day, the resident was found unresponsive and taken to the emergency room where she was treated for low blood sugar.”
“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 was given incorrect medications, the error was an isolated incident. The resident's physician was immediately notified of the error and staff monitored the resident's condition. When a change in condition was observed, the resident was sent to the hospital for further evaluation. The resident was treated in the hospital for low blood sugar and returned to their baseline health condition. The unlicensed personnel (ULP) responsible for the medication error received appropriate training and did not have a history of medication errors. The facility reported the incident and took action to reduce the risk of recurrence.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility immediately notified the physician after the error was identified. Facility staff monitored the resident. Emergency medical services were immediately notified after the resident was found unresponsive. The facility reported the incident and retrained facility staff.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed April 19, 2024: no correction orders issued.
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”
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 41 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 CORNERSTONE RESIDENCE OF FOSSTON
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 423364
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-12-01
- Licensed capacity
- 41
- Licensee
- CORNERSTONE RESIDENCE OF FOSSTON
- County
- Polk County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Kari Swanson
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 0.6 mi, nursing home 0.6 mi, pharmacy 0.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Essentia Health Fosston, Fosston. 0.6 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- First Care Living Center, Fosston. 0.6 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- White Earth Home Health, White Earth. 33.2 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Pharmacy. 0.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56542 as rural (rural area).
- Hospice
- 2 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56542.
Essentia Health Hospice West, office in Fosston, 0.6 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- First Care Medical Services, Fosston. 0.6 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
- Area not mapped by FEMA. (FEMA flood map)
- Wildfire risk to homes
- In Fosston, MN, risk to homes is greater than 78% of communities in Minnesota and 53% of communities nationwide. USDA rates the whole town or city, not this address. (USDA Forest Service, Wildfire Risk to Communities, April 2026)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively high. By hazard: inland flooding relatively high, wildfire relatively high, tornado relatively moderate, heat wave very 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 state recorded a finding in February 2025. 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 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | See above |
| 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 | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Cornerstone Residence of Fosst provide?
Cornerstone Residence of Fosst is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Fosston, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 41 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Cornerstone Residence of Fosst?
No. We publish state licensing details for Cornerstone Residence of Fosst 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 Cornerstone Residence of Fosst 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. Cornerstone Residence of Fosst does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Cornerstone Residence of Fosst?
Use Cornerstone Residence of Fosst's website, cornerstoneshc.com, or visit at 115 1st Street East, Fosston, MN 56542.
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