Assisted Living and Memory Care
Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road
3704 Cardinal Road, Minnetonka, MN 55345 · Map
Licensed for 7 residents · EPIPHANY CARE HOMES LLC
Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Minnetonka, Minnesota. It is licensed for 7 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
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, 7 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 421983, current license dated Oct 1, 2025. Licensee EPIPHANY CARE HOMES LLC.
Nearest emergency room
4.9 miles
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, rated 3 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road this community | 7 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated | |
| Epiphany Care Homes, Orchard Road | 0.1 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Landings of Minnetonka | 0.2 mi | 90 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Merry Lake | 0.6 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Morning Glory Homes Incorporat | 0.8 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- February 20, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (February 20, 2025, state report JEZ511)
MDH: “On February 18, 2025, through February 20, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed February 20, 2025: 8 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-A).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which included a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test, for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B, ULP-E). [...]”
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 training and drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan 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 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required 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 a background study (BGS) was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system for submitting background study requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS)) for two of seven employees (housing manger (HM)/unlicensed personnel (ULP)-A, ULP-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study (BGS) was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system for submitting background study requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS)) for two of seven employees (housing manger (HM)/unlicensed personnel (ULP)-A, ULP-B). [...]”
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 1830: 144G.71 Subd. 14 Renewal of prescriptions Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure prescriptions were renewed at least every 12 months for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescriptions were renewed at least every 12 months for three of three residents (R1, 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 widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic [...]”
Rule cited: “Prescriptions must be renewed at least every 12 months or more frequently as indicated by the assessment in subdivision 2. Prescriptions for controlled substances must comply with chapter 152.”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2)
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R1, R3) with hospital bed rails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R1, R3) with hospital bed rails. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- July 21, 2022: report 1Q1M11 · 17 correction orders
Details
Survey completed July 21, 2022: 17 correction orders
- Tag 460: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a means for two of two residents (R1, R2) to request assistance for health and safety needs as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a means for two of two residents (R1, R2) to request assistance for health and safety needs as required. The licensee did not have a system in place for residents at the facility to request assistance for health and safety needs 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This had the potential to affect all seven residents at the facility. [...]”
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 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and document a facility staffing plan to meet the needs of all residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and document a facility staffing plan to meet the needs of all residents. This had the potential to affect all seven residents, staff and visitors of the facility. [...]”
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 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 had the potential to affect all seven residents living at the facility. [...]”
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 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post required information related to the licensee's grievance procedure with all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to post required information related to the licensee's grievance procedure with all required content. This had the potential to affect all seven residents, staff and visitors of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- 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 was developed to include required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) 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 required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
Show all 17
- 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 have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content. In addition, the license failed to ensure its missing person policy and procedure was reviewed at least quarterly. This had the potential to affect all seven residents, staff and any visitors to the facility. [...]”
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 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2)-(3) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-on (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain facility fire extinguishers.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain facility fire extinguishers. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) install and maintain portable fire extinguishers in accordance with the State Fire Code; (3) install portable fire extinguishers having a minimum 2-A:10-B:C rating within Group R-3 occupancies, as defined by the State Fire Code, located so that the travel [...]”
- Tag 920: 144G.50 Subd. 2 (c) Contract information Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract that did not conflict with current statutes and rules for Assisted Living licensure for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract that did not conflict with current statutes and rules for Assisted Living licensure for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. This had potential to affect all seven residents of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) The contract must include: (1) a disclosure of the category of assisted living facility license held by the facility and, if the facility is not an assisted living facility with dementia care, a disclosure that it does not hold an assisted living facility [...]”
- Tag 930: 144G.50 Subd. 2 (d-e; 1-4) Contract information Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. This had potential to affect all seven current residents in the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(d) The contract must include a description of the facility's complaint resolution process available to residents, including the name and contact information of the person representing the facility who is designated to handle and resolve complaints. [...]”
- Tag 940: 144G.50 Subd. 2 (e; 5-7) Contract information Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. This had potential to affect all seven residents of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(5) a description of the facility's policies related to medical assistance waivers under chapter 256S and section 256B.49 and the housing support program under chapter 256I, including: (i) whether the facility is enrolled with the commissioner of human [...]”
- 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 offer the opportunity to identify a designated representative for three of three residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to offer the opportunity to identify a designated representative for three of three residents (R1, R2) 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 [...]”
- 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 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 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all seven residents who received assisted living services from the licensee. [...]”
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 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will 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 (RN) developed written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available. This had the potential to affect all seven residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”
- Tag 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications 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 ensure documentation of the disposition of medications included all required information for one of one discharged resident (R8) with record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure required dementia care policies and procedures were developed and provided to each resident and/or the resident's legal and designated representative at the time of move-in.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure required dementia care policies and procedures were developed and provided to each resident and/or the resident's legal and designated representative at the time of move-in. This had the potential to affect all seven residents in the facility. [...]”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have an evaluation for an activity plan for two of two residents (R1, R2) who resided in the dementia-care licensed facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have an evaluation for an activity plan for two of two residents (R1, R2) who resided in the dementia-care licensed facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
- Tag 460: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- August 16, 2022 · report HL20517004M
- August 10, 2022 · report HL20517001C
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 7 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 EPIPHANY CARE HOMES LLC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 421983
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-01
- Licensed capacity
- 7
- Licensee
- EPIPHANY CARE HOMES LLC
- County
- Hennepin County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Aimee Slaughter
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 4.9 mi, nursing home 2.2 mi, pharmacy 2.1 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, Saint Louis Park. 4.9 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Hope Springs at Minnetonka, Minnetonka. 2.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Nightingale Home Healthcare, Minnetonka. 2.2 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 2.1 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55345 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Minnetonka Dialysis Unit, Minnetonka, 2.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Davita St Louis Park Dialysis Center, Saint Louis Park, 4.5 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Concerto Minnesota LLC, Saint Louis Park, 5.0 miles away, straight line - Hospice
- 24 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55345.
St Croix Hospice, office in Hopkins, 2.4 miles away, straight line
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, office in Saint Louis Park, 5.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Lifesprk Hospice LLC, office in Saint Louis Park, 5.9 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 2 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Park Nicollet Clinic, St Louis Park. 4.9 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 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 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?
- Who is here at night? Are they awake, or asleep and on call?
- Who covers when the owner is sick, on vacation, or away for the day? Can we meet them?
- Is it one flat rate, or does it rise with care needs?
- Can you help someone who needs two people to move, or a mechanical lift?
- 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 we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road provide?
Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Minnetonka, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 7 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road?
No. We publish state licensing details for Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road 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 Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road cost?
Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road?
Use Epiphany Care Homes, Cardinal Road's website, epiphanycarehome.com, or visit at 3704 Cardinal Road, Minnetonka, MN 55345.
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