Lilisity

Assisted Living

Grace Haven Assisted Living

301 3rd Street East, Madison, MN 56256 · Map
Licensed for 10 residents · GRACE HAVEN ASSISTED LIVING

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Grace Haven Assisted Living is a state-licensed assisted living community in Madison, Minnesota. It is licensed for 10 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingCare offered
10 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility
$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

Assisted Living in Minnesota typically starts at $2,200 to $4,800 a month. Based on 74 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Lilisity’s independent report

What the public record shows

Gathered by Lilisity from state and federal sources. Communities can’t edit this part of the page.

State inspections

0Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Feb 21, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 10 residents

Assisted Living Facility 423941, current license dated Feb 1, 2026. Licensee GRACE HAVEN ASSISTED LIVING.

Nearest emergency room

0.5 miles

Madison Hospital.

Side by side with nearby communities

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

CommunityDistanceLicensed capacityPublished starting priceLicenseInspection citations
Grace Haven Assisted Living this community10Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Prairie Winds Senior and Assis0.5 mi24Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Appleton Area Health, South Barduson Street15.5 mi35Not publishedActive1 substantiated
Sanford Health Sylvan Place21.5 mi25Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Brookside Senior Living23.1 mi68Not publishedActive0 substantiated
State inspection record0 substantiated
Last evaluation
February 21, 2025
Evaluations on record
2
Investigations substantiated
0 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
0 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (February 21, 2025, state report F4QK11)

MDH: “On February 18, 2025, through February 20, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed February 21, 2025: 8 correction orders

  • 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 implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    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 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

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to develop an all-hazards risk assessment emergency preparedness program and plan to include Appendix Z required elements. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

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

  • Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Two (2)
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”

  • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content. 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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D). [...]”

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

Show all 8
  • Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for two of two employees (housing manager/unlicensed staff (HM/ULP-B) and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for two of two employees (housing manager/unlicensed staff (HM/ULP-B) and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”

  • 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 and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of two residents (R1).

    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 one of two residents (R1). [...]”

    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 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D) when providing assistance with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D) when providing assistance with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. [...]”

    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 [...]”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.

Earlier evaluations (1)
  • September 8, 2022: report PKBS11 · 13 correction orders
    Details

    Survey completed September 8, 2022: 13 correction orders

    • Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the required staffing plan was developed and posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff and any visitors of the licensee.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the required staffing plan was developed and posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff and any visitors of the licensee. [...]”

      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 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 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 in a conspicuous place information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content. This had the potential to affect the licensee's current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

      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 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

      Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”

    • Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an annual performance review was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) with employee record reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an annual performance review was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) with employee 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. [...]”

    Show all 13
    • Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · 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 documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D).

      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 documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D). [...]”

      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 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 and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently.

      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 and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently. This had the potential to affect residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

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

    • Tag 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2)-(3) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: TWENTY-ONE (21) days
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview the licensee failed to ensure installation and maintenance of portable fire extinguishers at the facility. This had the potential to directly affect all 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 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 provide the required fire safety training and evacuation plans for the residents and staff.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide the required fire safety training and evacuation plans for the residents and staff. This has 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 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract prior to providing assisted living services for five of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5, R2) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract prior to providing assisted living services for five of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5, R2) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility may not offer or provide housing or assisted living services to any individual unless it has executed a written contract with the resident. [...]”

    • Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications 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 all medications were securely locked in substantially constructed compartments and permit only authorized personnel had access. This had the potential to affect the licensee's current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

      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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were not expired for two of three residents (R1, R3) and the licensee's house medication supply.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were not expired for two of three residents (R1, R3) and the licensee's house medication supply. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents. [...]”

      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 3090: 144.6502, Subd. 8 Notice to Visitors Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the required notice was posted at the main entry way of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all current residents in the assisted living facility, staff and any visitors of the licensee.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the required notice was posted at the main entry way of the establishment to display statutory language to disclose electronic monitoring activity, potentially affecting all current residents in the assisted living facility, staff and any visitors of the licensee. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Subd. 8.Notice to visitors. (a) A facility must post a sign at each facility entrance accessible to visitors that states: "Electronic monitoring devices, including security cameras and audio devices, may be present to record persons and activities." (b) The [...]”

    From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.

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”

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 10 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 GRACE HAVEN ASSISTED LIVING
License type
Assisted Living Facility
License number
423941
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-02-01
Licensed capacity
10
Licensee
GRACE HAVEN ASSISTED LIVING
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Deborah Werner

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 0.5 mi, nursing home 0.5 mi, pharmacy 21.3 mi
Nearest hospital with an emergency room
Madison Hospital, Madison. 0.5 miles away, straight line.
Nearest Medicare nursing home
Madison Healthcare Services, Madison. 0.5 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office
Madison Home Health Agency, Madison. 0.5 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy
Canby Drug & Gifts. 21.3 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area
USDA classes ZIP code 56256 as rural (rural area).
Hospice
3 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56256.
Nearest geriatric medicine practice
Hutchinson Health, Hutchinson. 87.9 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 relatively moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas

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

Flood zone
Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
FEMA National Risk Index
Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire relatively low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively high, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)

A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.

Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record

Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.

  1. The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
  2. What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
  3. How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
  4. What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
  5. What fees are charged at move-in?
  6. How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
  7. How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
  8. Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
  9. For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
  10. Is the apartment held during a hospital stay, and at what cost?
What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates

Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.

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

Grace Haven Assisted Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Madison, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 10 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Grace Haven Assisted Living?

No. We publish state licensing details for Grace Haven Assisted Living 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 Grace Haven Assisted Living 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. Grace Haven Assisted Living does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Grace Haven Assisted Living?

Use Grace Haven Assisted Living's website, gracehaven.biz, or visit at 301 3rd Street East, Madison, MN 56256.

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

Report a wrong fact

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