Assisted Living and Memory Care

Guardian Angels by the Lake

13439 185th Lane Nw, Elk River, MN 55330 · Map
Licensed for 100 residents · GUARDIAN ANGELS BY THE LAKE

State license active

Is this your community? Claim this listing

Guardian Angels by the Lake is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Elk River, Minnesota. It is licensed for 100 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care

100 residentsLicensed capacity

State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care

$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.

Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 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

1Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Mar 12, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 100 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 425951, current license dated Aug 1, 2026. Licensee GUARDIAN ANGELS BY THE LAKE.

Nearest emergency room

8.3 miles

Centracare Health - Monticello.

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
Guardian Angels by the Lake this community		100	Not published	Active	1 substantiated
Whispering Pines Assisted Livi	0.7 mi	8	Not published	Active	3 substantiated
Lakeview Estate	1.0 mi	5	Not published	Active	1 substantiated
Direct Home Care Services	1.9 mi	4	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Elk River Senior Living	2.9 mi	115	Not published	Active	0 substantiated

State inspection record1 substantiated

Last evaluation: March 12, 2025
Evaluations on record: 2
Investigations substantiated: 1 kept 7 years
Inconclusive: 2 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated: 4 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (March 12, 2025, state report MFHZ11)

MDH: “On March 10, 2025, through March 12, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed March 12, 2025: 5 correction orders

Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code. 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 including evacuation plan with room numbers and locations of rooms.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content including evacuation plan with room numbers and locations of rooms. 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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to include a written statement of a treatment service on the resident's service plan for two of three residents (R2, R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to include a written statement of a treatment service on the resident's service plan for two of three residents (R2, R3). [...]”
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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R2) with hospital-style bed rails.
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 acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R2) with hospital-style 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 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00

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

Earlier evaluations (1)

February 28, 2023: report HGJP11 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed February 28, 2023: 10 correction orders
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for three of four unlicensed personnel (ULP-F, ULP-G, ULP-H).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control related to gloving and hand hygiene for three of four unlicensed personnel (ULP-F, ULP-G, ULP-H). [...]”
  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 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records 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 documentation was maintained for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F) to include all required content.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency documentation was maintained for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F) to include all required content. [...]”
  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 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms outside and in the immediate vicinity of sleeping rooms in a two bedroom apartment at the facility.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms outside and in the immediate vicinity of sleeping rooms in a two bedroom apartment at the facility. This deficient condition had the ability to affect one or a limited number of staff and residents. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (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 one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (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 10
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for each resident to include all required content for one of five residents (R9).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for each resident to include all required content for one of five residents (R9). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the medication management services that will be provided to 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 prescription medications were stored according to the manufacturer's directions for four of four residents (R8, R13, R14, and R15). [...]”
  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 discard expired medication for one of nine residents (R8).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to discard expired medication for one of nine residents (R8). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of [...]”
  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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide documentation in the resident's record regarding the disposition of medication to include the medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, date of disposition, and names of staff and other individuals involved in the disposition for two of two discharged residents (R1, R2).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide documentation in the resident's record regarding the disposition of medication to include the medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, date of disposition, and names of staff and other individuals involved in the disposition for two of two discharged residents (R1, R2). [...]”
  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 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 five residents (R4).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on 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 five residents (R4). [...]”
  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 [...]”
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

October 31, 2024 · report HL308184481M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected Resident #1 and Resident #2 when the AP did not provide cares per Resident #1's and Resident #2's plan of care. In the morning hours, Resident #1 and Resident #2 were found on the floor in their separate apartments and taken to the hospital via emergency services.”
“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. The AP failed to provide services to Resident #1 and Resident #2 according to their individual plan of care. Resident #1 was transferred to the hospital and diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis (a serious condition resulting from the death of muscle fibers releasing their contents into the blood stream after a traumatic event). Resident #2 was found with a cut to her left temple and dried blood on her face and diagnosed at the hospital with a subdural hemorrhage (a bleed under the membrane covering the brain). Video footage showed the AP sitting at the darkened nurses' station much of the night shift.”
Action taken by facility: “The alleged perpetrator is no longer employed by the facility. The facility obtained additional video cameras and implemented an audit process to assist in ensuring residents receive cares.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed August 27, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure two of two residents reviewed (R1, R2) were free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure two of two residents reviewed (R1, R2) were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual person 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.”

Inconclusive investigations (2)

February 23, 2026 · report HL308189203M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), a licensed nurse, neglected the resident when the AP did not perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) when the resident passed away.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive. It was unable to be determined if the resident's death could or could not have been prevented by initiating CPR. The AP found the resident without a pulse for an unknown amount of time and did not provide emergency intervention measures because the resident's Physician Orders for Life Sustaining Treatment (POLST) form contained conflicting instructions.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility called 911 and reviewed with all residents their advance directives for accuracy and clarity.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed January 27, 2026: no correction orders issued.
February 5, 2026 · report HL308187067M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident was administered inaccurate medications resulting in weight loss, change in condition and placed on hospice twelve days after the resident returned to the facility.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive. Facility licensed staff were provided with new orders via fax, in person and through a pharmacy's electronic medication order system. Although the medication transcription and administration errors occurred, the resident had advanced co-morbities, a urinary tract infection and multiple recent medication changes, it could not be determined the error caused the change in condition.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reached out to providers and pharmacy. The facility requested supportive services for the resident from outside agencies.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed November 19, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to reconcile the discharge medication list after 6 weeks stay in geri-psych.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to reconcile the discharge medication list after 6 weeks stay in geri-psych. The failure to reconcile resulted in several transcription errors and medications were administered incorrectly for one of one residents (R1) who received medication management services. [...]”
  Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”

Unsubstantiated investigations (4)

July 8, 2025 · report HL308181862M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident sustained several injuries to his toes which required treatment and antibiotics. Also, the facility neglected the resident when the resident fell several times in less than one month. The resident sustained a head injury and skin tear.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated related to both allegations.”
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 related to both allegations. Although the resident developed wounds to his toes, evidence did not show the development was caused by the facility not providing cares or services to the resident. Additionally, there was no evidence to show the facility not providing cares, services, or supervision led to his falls.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility assessed the resident after his falls. The facility requested podiatry and home care for the wounds on his toes.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed May 5, 2025: no correction orders issued.
July 8, 2025 · report HL308183123M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), facility unlicensed personnel, neglected the resident when the AP administered an incorrect dose of Dilaudid, and the resident was hospitalized. Additionally, facility staff failed to notify family of a fall.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. The AP followed the electronic medication administration record and administered the correct dose of Dilaudid (opioid analgesic). Hospital records indicated the resident was admitted for deep vein thrombosis (blood clot) of the right leg and bilateral pulmonary embolisms (blood clots in the lungs). The administration of Dilaudid had no correlation on the resident's change in condition and hospitalization. Additionally, licensed staff notified family of a fall without injury.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility called 911 for emergency services when the resident had a significant change in condition.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed June 30, 2025: no correction orders issued.
July 8, 2025 · report HL308189782M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected the resident when the AP failed to complete the resident's scheduled service one evening. Staff found the resident deceased the next morning.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. Although the AP failed to complete a scheduled service the night before the resident was found deceased, there is no evidence to demonstrate failing to complete the service played a role in the resident's death. There was not a pattern of error for the AP to miss providing services.”
Action taken by facility: “The AP is no longer employed by the facility. The facility completed education with staff regarding completing and documenting services.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed May 5, 2025: no correction orders issued.
January 23, 2025 · report HL308185040C
Details
Survey completed January 23, 2025: no correction orders issued.

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

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

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 100 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 GUARDIAN ANGELS BY THE LAKE

License type: Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number: 425951
License status: Active
Current license dated: 2026-08-01
Licensed capacity: 100
Licensee: GUARDIAN ANGELS BY THE LAKE
County: Sherburne County

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.

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 8.3 mi, nursing home 2.4 mi, pharmacy 3.0 mi

Nearest hospital with an emergency room: Centracare Health - Monticello, Monticello. 8.3 miles away, straight line.
Nearest Medicare nursing home: Guardian Angels Care Center, Elk River. 2.4 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office: Triniti Home Health And Hospice, Elk River. 2.4 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy: CVS Pharmacy. 3.0 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area: USDA classes ZIP code 55330 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
Dialysis within 15 miles: Fmc Dialysis - Central Mn Regional Dialysis, Elk River, 3.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Big Lake, Big Lake, 4.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 5 of 5 stars)
Davita Maple Grove Dialysis Unit, Maple Grove, 13.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Hospice: 23 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55330.
Triniti Hospice, office in Elk River, 2.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Olive Grove Hospice LLC, office in Blaine, 21.9 miles away, straight line
North Memorial Home Hlth Hospc, office in Robbinsdale, 24.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice: Group Health Inc, Coon Rapids. 17.0 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 high, wildfire relatively 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 October 2024. What was it, and how was it fixed?
The current license dates from 2026. 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 relatively 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		No plain statements of services found

Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask

What type of care does Guardian Angels by the Lake provide?

Guardian Angels by the Lake is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Elk River, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 100 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Guardian Angels by the Lake?

No. We publish state licensing details for Guardian Angels by the Lake 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 Guardian Angels by the Lake 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. Guardian Angels by the Lake does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Guardian Angels by the Lake?

Use Guardian Angels by the Lake's website, guardianangelsmn.org, or visit at 13439 185th Lane Nw, Elk River, MN 55330.

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

Other communities in Sherburne County

See all Assisted Living in Elk River →