Assisted Living and Memory Care
Hayden Grove of St Anthony
2601 Stinson Parkway, St. Anthony, MN 55418 · Map
Licensed for 155 residents · HAYDEN GROVE OF ST ANTHONY
Hayden Grove of St Anthony is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in St. Anthony, Minnesota. It is licensed for 155 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Lilisity’s independent report
What the public record shows
Gathered by Lilisity from state and federal sources. Communities can’t edit this part of the page.
License
Active, 155 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 425454, current license dated Jun 10, 2026. Licensee HAYDEN GROVE OF ST ANTHONY.
Nearest emergency room
3.3 miles
Hennepin County Medical Center, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hayden Grove of St Anthony this community | 155 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Valora Senior Living of St. Anthony | 0.1 mi | 97 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated |
| Golden Nest | 0.5 mi | 24 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Everbright Care Homes | 0.6 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| MN Care Access | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- June 17, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 2 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (June 17, 2026, state report L3WP11)
MDH: “On June 15, 2026, through June 17, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed June 17, 2026: 7 correction orders
- Tag 485: 144G.41 Subdivision 1.a (a) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a menu a week in advance and inform residents in advance of menu changes.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide a menu a week in advance and inform residents in advance of menu changes. This practice resulted in a level one violation (a violation that will cause only minimal impact on the residents and does not affect 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 residents). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must offer to provide or make available 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 Agriculture (USDA) [...]”
- 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 maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z. 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 1330: 144G.60 Subd. 4 (b) Unlicensed personnel Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed for all required skill areas, prior to providing services, for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations were completed for all required skill areas, prior to providing services, for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Unlicensed personnel performing delegated nursing tasks in an assisted living facility must: (1) have successfully completed training and demonstrated competency by successfully completing a written or oral test of the topics in section 144G.61, [...]”
- Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) (3) Training in Dementia, Mental Illness, and De- Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff completed at least eight hours of initial dementia training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date for two of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff completed at least eight hours of initial dementia training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date for two of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-E, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care staff must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted resident reassessment and monitoring at least every 90 calendar days for two of four residents (R2, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted resident reassessment and monitoring at least every 90 calendar days for two of four residents (R2, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to accurately maintain an individualized medication management plan (IMMP) to include all required content for four of four residents (R2, R3, R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to accurately maintain an individualized medication management plan (IMMP) to include all required content for four of four residents (R2, R3, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, a registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or qualified staff delegated the task by a registered nurse must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the [...]”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to discard expired medication for one of four residents (R9).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to discard expired medication for one of four residents (R9). In addition, the licensee failed to ensure medication label included expiration or beyond-use date for two of four residents (R8, R10). [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- May 15, 2024: report ZMR511 · 6 correction orders
Details
Survey completed May 15, 2024: 6 correction orders
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complied with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents, employees, and visitors. [...]”
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 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 in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The licensee failed to maintain the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”
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 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, failed to provide the required training, and failed to provide the required drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on the interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content, failed to provide the required training, and failed to provide the required drills. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- 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
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 three residents (R1). [...]”
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 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review the licensee failed to discard expired medication for two of 11 residents (R6, R7) in the secured unit. 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 [...]”
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 medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, to whom the medications were given, and names of staff and other individuals involved in the disposition for one of one discharged resident (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 medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, to whom the medications were given, and names of staff and other individuals involved in the disposition for one of one discharged resident (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. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; MDH granted the assisted living license.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 14, 2025 · report HL394257586M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility abused the resident when an unlicensed care giver placed a wheelchair and recliner against the side of the resident's bed, and pillows under the residents' sheets, confining him to bed.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The unlicensed caregiver did place the wheelchair and recliner against the bed, and pillows under the residents' sheets, which confined the resident to bed. Additionally, several other unlicensed caregivers entered the room, observed this confinement, and did not remove nor report this to the facility nurse. While it was true one unlicensed caregiver initiated the resident's confinement by placing physical barriers next to his bed, multiple of the facility's unlicensed caregivers observed this in place but took no action to address it until after it was observed by one of the resident's visitors.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reported the incident and re-educated the staff about physical devices which may have the effect of a restraint.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed January 15, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details. No plan of correction is required for 2360 as its purpose is to doucment maltreatment occurred. [...]”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- February 12, 2025 · report HL394258342M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when she crushed the resident's medication, mixed them in milk, and forced the resident to drink it while co-workers held him.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive. The AP did crush the medications, even though the residents service plan stated do not crush the medications, and the AP mixed the medications in milk for administration. However, there was conflicting and/or a lack of evidence the resident was physically forced to drink the milk and medications. While the technique use during the medication pass may have been poor, it was unclear if abuse occurred.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility re-educated caregivers regarding medication pass technique including following instructions regarding crushing medications. The AP was no longer employed at the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action at this time.”
Survey completed January 15, 2025: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
- May 11, 2026 · report HL394251620M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), a facility staff member neglected the resident when the AP failed to follow the resident's plan of care, the resident fell, sustained a fractured femur and was hospitalized.”
“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 did not follow the resident's plan of care, however, the plan of care tasks assigned to the AP would not have prevented the resident's fall. The resident walked independently, was hospitalized after the fall, and returned to the facility.”
Action taken by facility: “Following the fall, the resident was transported to the hospital and education was completed with the AP regarding following the resident's plan of care.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed April 28, 2026: no correction orders issued.
- June 18, 2024 · report HL394253081M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
“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. Facility staff interacted with the resident during the meal and again before she left the dining room. The resident walked out of the dining room and into her apartment without signs she was choking. Video indicated staff checked on her approximately a minute later. Staff found the resident unresponsive, called 911 and followed the dispatcher's instructions until emergency responders arrived.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed May 23, 2024: no correction orders issued.
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
Level 1: “a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect health or safety”
Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”
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 155 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 HAYDEN GROVE OF ST ANTHONY
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 425454
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-06-10
- Licensed capacity
- 155
- Licensee
- HAYDEN GROVE OF ST ANTHONY
- County
- Hennepin County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Kylie Larson
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 3.3 mi, nursing home 1.5 mi, pharmacy 0.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis. 3.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Bywood East Health Care, Minneapolis. 1.5 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Provident Home Healthcare, St Anthony. 0.8 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Hennepin Healthcare St. Anthony Village Clinic and Pharmacy. 0.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55418 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fmc Dialysis - New Brighton, Roseville, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Davita University Dialysis Unit Riverside, Saint Paul, 3.0 miles away, straight line (has a shift starting after 5 pm; CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
U Of Mn Med Ctr, Fairview - Dialysis, Minneapolis, 3.3 miles away, straight line - Hospice
- 23 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55418.
Interim Healthcare Of The Twin Cities, Inc., office in Roseville, 2.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Presbyterian Homes Hospice Inc, office in Roseville, 3.5 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Accentcare Fairview Hospice - West, LLC, office in Saint Paul, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 2 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Steven Lawler, MD, Minneapolis. 1.1 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 state recorded a finding in February 2025. 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 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 | No plain statements of services found |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Hayden Grove of St Anthony provide?
Hayden Grove of St Anthony is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in St. Anthony, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 155 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Hayden Grove of St Anthony?
No. We publish state licensing details for Hayden Grove of St Anthony 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 Hayden Grove of St Anthony 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. Hayden Grove of St Anthony does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Hayden Grove of St Anthony?
Use Hayden Grove of St Anthony's website, haydengroveseniorliving.com, or visit at 2601 Stinson Parkway, St. Anthony, MN 55418.
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