Assisted Living
Ivy Hill Senior Care
607 Nw 2nd Avenue, Faribault, MN 55021 · Map
Licensed for 16 residents · IVY HILL SENIOR CARE INC
Ivy Hill Senior Care is a state-licensed assisted living community in Faribault, Minnesota. It is licensed for 16 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, 16 residents
Assisted Living Facility 426078, current license dated Jul 1, 2026. Licensee IVY HILL SENIOR CARE INC.
Nearest emergency room
1.0 miles
Allina Health Faribault 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivy Hill Senior Care this community | 16 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Maplewood Homes of Faribault, Nw 5th Street | 0.2 mi | 14 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Rizon Homes, 3rd Avenue Sw | 0.5 mi | 9 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Maplewood Homes of Faribault, 1st Street Sw | 0.6 mi | 11 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Rizon Homes, 7th Street Nw | 0.6 mi | 10 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 7, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 7, 2025, state report 3Z7111)
MDH: “On July 7, 2025, through July 9, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 9, 2025: 9 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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) including documentation of completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) including documentation of completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
- Tag 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 (EP) plan with the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with the required content. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, record review and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 9
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system for submitting background study requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS) with the assisted living license for one of 17 employees (activity director (AD)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 (web-based system for submitting background study requests to the Department of Human Services (DHS) with the assisted living license for one of 17 employees (activity director (AD)-C). This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on July 7, 2025. [...]”
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 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 direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date in which the individual begins working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date in which the individual begins working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-E). [...]”
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, 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) completed a comprehensive reassessment not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last assessment for two of two residents (R1, R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive reassessment not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last assessment for two of two residents (R1, R2). [...]”
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised and signed by the resident to reflect the current services provided for two of two residents (R1, R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised and signed by the resident to reflect the current services provided for two of two residents (R1, R2). [...]”
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. [...]”
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
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- May 4, 2022: report IEE411 · 16 correction orders
Details
Survey completed May 4, 2022: 16 correction orders
- Tag 430: 144G.40 Subd. 2 Uniform checklist disclosure of services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a copy of the uniform checklist disclosure of services with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide a copy of the uniform checklist disclosure of services with the required content for two of two residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. This had the potential to affect all 15 residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must provide to prospective residents: (1) a disclosure of the categories of assisted living licenses available and the category of license held by the facility; (2) a written checklist listing all services permitted under [...]”
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the required staffing plan was developed and posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff and any visitors of the licensee.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the required staffing plan was developed and posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's current residents, staff and any visitors of the licensee. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 490: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (ii)-(vii) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have daily program of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs, that create opportunities for active participation in the community at large.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have daily program of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs, that create opportunities for active participation in the community at large. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(ii) weekly housekeeping; (iii) weekly laundry service; (iv) upon the request of the resident, provide direct or reasonable assistance with arranging for transportation to medical and social services appointments, shopping, and other recreation, and provide [...]”
- Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content. This had the potential to affect the licensee's current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”
Show all 16
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an annual performance review was completed, and the licensee failed to ensure a current job description was included as part of the record for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C) with employee record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an annual performance review was completed, and the licensee failed to ensure a current job description was included as part of the record for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C) with employee record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid employee, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”
- Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of one employee (registered nurse (RN)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of one employee (registered nurse (RN)-C). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure it completed a written emergency disaster plan with all required content outlined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all current residents, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure it completed a written emergency disaster plan with all required content outlined in Appendix Z. This had the potential to affect all current 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 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the required fire safety training and evacuation plans for residents and staff.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide the required fire safety training and evacuation plans for residents and staff. This has the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for the licensee's two of three current residents (R1, R4) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for the licensee's two of three current residents (R1, R4) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility may not offer or provide housing or assisted living services to any individual unless it has executed a written contract with the resident. [...]”
- Tag 1460: 144G.63 Subdivision 1 Orientation of staff and supervisors 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 training to the assisted living licensing requirements and regulations for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation training to the assisted living licensing requirements and regulations for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “All staff providing and supervising direct services must complete an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing assisted living services to residents. [...]”
- Tag 1490: 144G.63 Subd. 4 Training required relating to dementia Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff received dementia training in the required areas for two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) with employee records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff received dementia training in the required areas for two of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) with employee records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “All direct care staff and supervisors providing direct services must demonstrate an understanding of the training specified in section 144G.64.”
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training 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 at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment for one of one employee (registered nurse (RN)-C) with employee record reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment for one of one employee (registered nurse (RN)-C) with employee record reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to provide evidence of dementia care training on required topics for one of two employees (registered nurse (RN)-C), with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”
- 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 ensure medications were labeled correctly for one of one resident (R4) with records reviewed.
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 (R4) with records reviewed. [...]”
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: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a treatment management plan to include all required content for one of two residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a treatment management plan to include all required content for one of two residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
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: no immediate fines.
- Tag 430: 144G.40 Subd. 2 Uniform checklist disclosure of services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
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”
Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”
Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”
Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”
Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”
Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.
What these terms mean
MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”
“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”
For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).
Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.
MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 16 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 IVY HILL SENIOR CARE INC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 426078
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-07-01
- Licensed capacity
- 16
- Licensee
- IVY HILL SENIOR CARE INC
- County
- Rice County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Mackenzie Ramsey
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 1.0 mi, nursing home 0.7 mi, pharmacy 0.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Allina Health Faribault Medical Center, Faribault. 1.0 mile away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- The Emeralds at Faribault LLC, Faribault. 0.7 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Rice County Phns, Faribault. 0.3 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 0.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55021 as micropolitan (micropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Faribault Dialysis Unit, Faribault, 1.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fmc - Cannon Valley, Dundas, 7.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Northfield At Home, Northfield, 10.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 1 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 9 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55021.
- Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Southern Cities Clinic, Faribault. 0.2 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively low, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- 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?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
- Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
- For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
- Is the apartment held during a hospital stay, and at what cost?
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: 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 |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Ivy Hill Senior Care provide?
Ivy Hill Senior Care is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Faribault, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 16 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Ivy Hill Senior Care?
No. We publish state licensing details for Ivy Hill Senior Care 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 Ivy Hill Senior Care 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. Ivy Hill Senior Care does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Ivy Hill Senior Care?
Visit Ivy Hill Senior Care at 607 Nw 2nd Avenue, Faribault, MN 55021.
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