Assisted Living and Memory Care
Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood
1670 Legacy Parkway East, Maplewood, MN 55109 · Map
Licensed for 163 residents · ECUMEN SEASONS AT MAPLEWOOD
Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Maplewood, Minnesota. It is licensed for 163 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, 163 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422079, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee ECUMEN SEASONS AT MAPLEWOOD.
Nearest emergency room
0.4 miles
M Health Fairview St John'S Hospital, rated 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood this community | 163 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated | |
| Maple Hill Senior Living | 0.3 mi | 100 | Not published | Active | 4 substantiated |
| Maplewood Meadow Assisted Living | 0.3 mi | 20 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Boden Senior Living - Maplewood | 0.4 mi | 66 | Not published | Active | 7 substantiated |
| Bright Hope Care | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
State inspection record3 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- August 8, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 3 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 2 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (August 8, 2025, state report FZ5H11)
MDH: “On August 4, 2025, through August 8, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed August 8, 2025: 3 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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included an employee TB symptom and history screen and completion of a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or TB blood test, no greater than 90 days prior to hire date for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included an employee TB symptom and history screen and completion of a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or TB blood test, no greater than 90 days prior to hire date for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required 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. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 9, 2022: report JICP11 · 14 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 9, 2022: 14 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 (21) days
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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 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 was developed to include review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual, including other vulnerable adults; the person's risk of abusing other vulnerable adults and statements of the specific measures to be taken to minimize the risk of abuse for six of six residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan was developed to include review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual, including other vulnerable adults; the person's risk of abusing other vulnerable adults and statements of the specific measures to be taken to minimize the risk of abuse for six of six residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was completed and documented for one of one licensed practical nurse (LPN)-A with record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was completed and documented for one of one licensed practical nurse (LPN)-A with record 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 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide required
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, record review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide required content on the fire procedure for residents in the fire safety and evacuation plan, minimum number of required employee evacuation drills, and required documentation on training of residents on fire safety and evacuation. 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. [...]”
- Tag 950: 144.50 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 ensure the assisted living contract included the designation of representative's statutory language for five of six residents (R1, R2, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract included the designation of representative's statutory language for five of six residents (R1, R2, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 14
- Tag 970: 144.50 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 facility's liability for resident health, safety, or personal property.
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 resident health, safety, or personal property. 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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the current service plan included a signature or other authentication by the licensee to document agreement on the services to be provided for one of six residents (R5) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the current service plan included a signature or other authentication by the licensee to document agreement on the services to be provided for one of six residents (R5) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 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 prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access. [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an opened insulin pen was dated when opened, and when the pen would expire for two of six residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an opened insulin pen was dated when opened, and when the pen would expire for two of six residents (R1, R2) 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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a treatment management record to include all required content for one of three treatment residents (R6)
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a treatment management record to include all required content for one of three treatment residents (R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a treatment management record to include all required content for one of three residents (R6) with treatment records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a treatment management record to include all required content for one of three residents (R6) with treatment records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a complete facility hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment (HVA) plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide a complete facility hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment (HVA) plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property. The hazards identified on the HVA plan must be mitigated to protect the residents from harm. This has the potential to directly affect all memory care residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to six of six residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to six of six residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for four of four residents (R2, R3, R5, R6) who utilized bed rails with records reviewed.
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 four of four residents (R2, R3, R5, R6) who utilized bed rails with records reviewed. [...]”
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.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- June 5, 2025 · report HL273989562M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility used an unapproved standing lift sling. The resident fell from the standing lift and fractured her back.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility failed to properly measure the resident for the correct size standing lift sling. The facility gave the resident a green, size large sling to use for transfers. The facility based the sling size only on weight. According to the mechanical standing lift sling size guide found on the manufacturer's website, the standing lift sling size was determined by measuring the resident's waist. Also, the resident voiced concerns about the sling size to staff and family not fitting right. The resident 's personal trainer also voiced concerns to staff that the sling the facility provided was too big. During a transfer the resident slipped out of the sling and fell to the floor fracturing her back.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reported the incident to family and completed an incident report.”
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 May 14, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
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
- October 31, 2024 · report HL273985641M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The Alleged Perpetrator (AP), a facility nurse, neglected a resident when the AP failed to assess, provide care for, or call emergency services when notified the resident had stroke-like symptoms. This delayed emergency medical treatment for seven hours.”
“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. Although the AP received training as a registered nurse and received training on protocols for medical emergencies by the facility, the AP neglected to recognize the residents emergent change in condition and call 911 resulting in a delay of care.”
Action taken by facility: “The AP is no longer employed by the facility. The facility filed a report with the Minnesota Board of Nursing.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed October 17, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual person wasresponsible 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
- September 12, 2023 · report HL273983082M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident sustained six falls within 2 weeks. The resident was not assessed following each fall, not monitored for injury, and no interventions were implemented to prevent further falls.”
“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. Staff failed to follow facility policies and procedures related to falls. Although the resident had a history and identified risk for falls, nursing staff failed to assess, treat, and monitor, the resident after falls with injury occurred. In addition, no new interventions were created to prevent further falls.”
Action taken by facility: “None.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed June 1, 2023: 1 correction order
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to a suitable and up-to-date plan, and subject to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of nine residents (R1) reviewed for falls.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to a suitable and up-to-date plan, and subject to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of nine residents (R1) reviewed for falls. The licensee failed to ensure injuries were monitored and/or resolved and failed to develop and implement new interventions related to the root cause of the falls. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
- March 12, 2026 · report HL273985382M
- January 18, 2024 · report HL273988289M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when cardiac (heart) medications were not administered to the resident as ordered which later required hospitalization.”
“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 a medication error did occur, this was an isolated event. Several days later the resident required hospitalization, but the missed medication was unrelated.”
Action taken by facility: “No action required.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed November 7, 2023: 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 163 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 ECUMEN SEASONS AT MAPLEWOOD
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422079
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 163
- Licensee
- ECUMEN SEASONS AT MAPLEWOOD
- County
- Ramsey County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Michelle O'Connor
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 0.4 mi, nursing home 0.9 mi, pharmacy 0.7 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview St John'S Hospital, Maplewood. 0.4 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Harmony Gardens, Maplewood. 0.9 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Mahadd Home Health Care, White Bear Lake. 1.3 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 0.7 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55109 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fmc - Maplewood Heights, Maplewood, 0.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Maplewood Dialysis Center, Maplewood, 0.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fmc Dialysis - Roseville, Roseville, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 25 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55109.
Suite Living Hospice, LLC, office in White Bear Lake, 0.7 miles away, straight line
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 3.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Ecumen Hospice, office in Shoreview, 5.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 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 relatively low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The state recorded a finding in June 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 | 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 | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood provide?
Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Maplewood, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 163 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood?
No. We publish state licensing details for Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood 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 Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood 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. Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood?
Use Ecumen Seasons at Maplewood's website, ecumenseasonsmaplewood.org, or visit at 1670 Legacy Parkway East, Maplewood, MN 55109.
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