Assisted Living
Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne
1132 Adams Street Ne, Minneapolis, MN 55413 · Map
Licensed for 5 residents · HOMEFELT ASSISTED LIVING
Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne is a state-licensed assisted living community in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is licensed for 5 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, 5 residents
Assisted Living Facility 423737, current license dated Jan 24, 2026. Licensee HOMEFELT ASSISTED LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
1.8 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne this community | 5 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| People Incorporated Dsl | 0.4 mi | 14 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Mainstreet Lodge | 0.5 mi | 51 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Lighthouse Assisted Living | 0.7 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Best Choice Home Care | 0.7 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- March 26, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 2 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (March 26, 2026, state report PO7T11)
MDH: “On March 23, 2026, through March 26, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed March 26, 2026: 18 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.
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. This had the potential to affect all three (3) 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 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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) with the required content for two of two residents (R2, R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) with the required content for two of two residents (R2, R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 (a) Staff records Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content to include an annual performance evaluation for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content to include an annual performance evaluation for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid staff member, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”
- Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employee tuberculosis (TB) testing was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee tuberculosis (TB) testing was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
Show all 18
- 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 (EPP) with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all staff, visitors, and residents receiving services under the license. [...]”
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 720: 144G.43 Subd. 2 Access to records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure resident records were maintained in a manner that allows for timely access, printing, or transmission of the records and were readily available to the commissioner upon request.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to ensure resident records were maintained in a manner that allows for timely access, printing, or transmission of the records and were readily available to the commissioner upon request. The deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The facility must ensure that the appropriate records are readily available to employees and contractors authorized to access the records. Resident records must be maintained in a manner that allows for timely access, printing, or transmission of the records. [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty One (21) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
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 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2-3) 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was affiliated with the licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) prior to providing services to residents for two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was affiliated with the licensee's health facility identification number (HFID) prior to providing services to residents for two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an initial nursing assessment for one of two residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an initial nursing assessment for one of two residents (R3). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written service plan, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of two residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written service plan, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of two residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan (IMMP) with the required content for one of two residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan (IMMP) with the required content for one of two residents (R3). [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were securely locked in a substantially constructed compartment and permitted only authorized personnel to have access. In addition, the licensee failed to monitor a medication refrigerator according to the manufacturer's directions. [...]”
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 labeled correctly for one of one resident (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled correctly for one of one resident (R3). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”
- Tag 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized treatment and therapy plan (ITTP) with the required content for one of two residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized treatment and therapy plan (ITTP) with the required content for one of two residents (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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
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)
- March 6, 2024: report T6QQ11 · 22 correction orders
Details
Survey completed May 31, 2024: 10 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
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 (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
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 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life. The licensee failed to provide a resident bedroom with the minimum window opening meeting the minimum state standard for egress. This affected the resident in bedroom #2 on the upper level. [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- Tag 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
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. [...]”
Show all 10
- Tag 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative (re-issued) scope/level letter C
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action needed.”
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. [...]”
Survey completed March 6, 2024: 12 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- 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 post in a conspicuous place, information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, record review, the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place, information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center. The notice must also state that if an individual has a complaint about the facility or person providing services, the individual may contact the Office of Health Facility Complaints at the Minnesota Department of Health. [...]”
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the employee record
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee record contained the required content for two of two employees clinical nurse supervisor and unlicensed personnel (CNS-B and ULP-A). [...]”
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 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2)-(3) 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 perform the required annual and monthly maintenance on fire extinguishers and failed to provide adequately rated portable fire extinguishers as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to perform the required annual and monthly maintenance on fire extinguishers and failed to provide adequately rated portable fire extinguishers as required. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) install and maintain portable fire extinguishers in accordance with the State Fire Code; (3) install portable fire extinguishers having a minimum 2-A:10-B:C rating within Group R-3 occupancies, as defined by the State Fire Code, located so that the travel [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and 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 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. [...]”
Show all 12
- Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Immediate
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life. The licensee failed to provide a resident bedroom with the minimum window opening meeting the minimum state standard for egress. This affected the unoccupied resident bedroom #2 on the upper level. [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- Tag 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of two residents (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and execute a written assisted living contract with the required content for one of two residents (R1). [...]”
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 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to identify a designated representative, or document the resident declined to designate a representative, for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to identify a designated representative, or document the resident declined to designate a representative, for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30 days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-A).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30 days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-A). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing client monitoring and reassessment, not to exceed 14 calendar days from the date of the initial assessment assessment for one of two residents (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing client monitoring and reassessment, not to exceed 14 calendar days from the date of the initial assessment assessment for one of two residents (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to finalize a current written service plan within 14 calendar days for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to finalize a current written service plan within 14 calendar days for one of one resident (R1). 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7)
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management plan with all required content for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management plan with all required content for one of one resident (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. [...]”
MDH letters in this report
- October 28, 2024: Notice Of Removal Of Conditions On Provisional License - License Granted
- September 18, 2024: Notice Of Provisional Extension And Conditional License
- June 18, 2024: Notice Of Provisional Extension And Conditional License
- April 10, 2024: Notice Of Provisional Extension And Conditional License
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is not in substantial compliance; MDH granted the assisted living license; no immediate fines.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- September 2, 2026 · report HL395533787C
Details
Survey completed August 19, 2026: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
- March 26, 2026 · report HL395537701C
Details
Survey completed March 11, 2026: no correction orders issued.
- July 2, 2025 · report HL395532202M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when the resident was smoking in her room with supplemental oxygen in use and the supplemental oxygen caught fire.”
“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. When the resident resumed the use of smoking cigarettes, the facility assessed and provided education to the resident on the dangers of smoking with oxygen in use. Despite the education, the resident smoked a cigarette using oxygen in her apartment that caused a fire. The error was an isolated and unforeseen incident. The resident sustained third degree burns to her face, she received treatment and returned to their baseline health condition.”
Action taken by facility: “Staff evacuated residents out of the facility and extinguished the fired. Emergency services was called, and the resident was transported to the hospital.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed June 16, 2025: 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 5 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 HOMEFELT ASSISTED LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 423737
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-01-24
- Licensed capacity
- 5
- Licensee
- HOMEFELT ASSISTED LIVING
- County
- Hennepin County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Andrea Sampson
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 1.8 mi, nursing home 0.5 mi, pharmacy 1.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis. 1.8 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Catholic Eldercare On Main, Minneapolis. 0.5 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Abc Home Health Care Plus LLC, Saint Anthony. 1.7 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55413 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Home Dialysis Unit, Minneapolis, 2.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Minneapolis Dialysis Unit, Minneapolis, 2.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
U Of Mn Med Ctr, Fairview - Dialysis, Minneapolis, 2.5 miles away, straight line - Hospice
- 17 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55413.
Intrepid Usa Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 2.1 miles away, straight line
Grace Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Allina Health Hospice & Palliative Care, office in Minneapolis, 3.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Emily Escue, MD, Minneapolis. 1.8 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, 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 September 2026. 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?
- Who is here at night? Are they awake, or asleep and on call?
- Who covers when the owner is sick, on vacation, or away for the day? Can we meet them?
- Is it one flat rate, or does it rise with care needs?
- Can you help someone who needs two people to move, or a mechanical lift?
- How many caregivers 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?
What we checked11 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: no FEMA wildfire rating of moderate or higher here |
| 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 |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne provide?
Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 5 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne?
No. We publish state licensing details for Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne 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 Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne 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. Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne?
Visit Homefelt Assisted Living, Adams Street Ne at 1132 Adams Street Ne, Minneapolis, MN 55413.
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