Assisted Living
Legacy Place
902 15th Street Ne, Sauk Rapids, MN 56379 · Map
Licensed for 8 residents · LEGACY PLACE LLC
Legacy Place is a state-licensed assisted living community in Sauk Rapids, Minnesota. It is licensed for 8 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, 8 residents
Assisted Living Facility 422144, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee LEGACY PLACE LLC.
Nearest emergency room
1.7 miles
Centracare - St. Cloud Hospital, rated 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legacy Place this community | 8 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Ridgeview Senior Living | 0.4 mi | 57 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated |
| Harmony View Assisted Living | 0.9 mi | 30 | Not published | Active | 4 substantiated |
| Ol-Us St Cloud | 1.4 mi | 70 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Summit Ridge Place | 1.6 mi | 25 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- January 17, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (January 17, 2025, state report 1OM511)
MDH: “On January 13, 2025, through January 16, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed January 17, 2025: 13 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) 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: “(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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) to contain all the required information for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) to contain all the required information for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review the licensee failed to develop an all-hazards risk assessment emergency preparedness (EP) program and plan to include Appendix Z required elements. In addition, the licensee failed to and evaluate its missing person policy at least quarterly. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one discharged resident (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) 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 provide smoke alarms that functioned and were interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm caused all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that functioned and were interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm caused all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) provide smoke alarms outside each separate sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms; (iii) provide smoke [...]”
Show all 13
- 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the portable fire extinguishers. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, 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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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 to provide the required training and to conduct evacuation drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and to provide the required training and to conduct evacuation 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 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 offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing with the required statutory language for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing with the required statutory language 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 1360: 144G.61 Subdivision 1 Instructor and competency evaluation requirem Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide training and competency evaluations by a registered nurse (RN) to one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-C) providing assisted living services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide training and competency evaluations by a registered nurse (RN) to one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-C) providing assisted living services. [...]”
Rule cited: “Instructors and competency evaluators must meet the following requirements: (1) training and competency evaluations of unlicensed personnel who only provide assisted living services specified in section 144G.08, subdivision 9, clauses (1) to (5), must be [...]”
- Tag 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (a) Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn 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 was completed for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C) to include all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C) to include all required content. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Training and competency evaluations for all unlicensed personnel must include the following: (1) documentation requirements for all services provided; (2) reports of changes in the resident's condition to the supervisor designated by the facility; (3) [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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 on which the individual began working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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 on which the individual began working for the licensee for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-C). [...]”
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 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 label a time sensitive medication with an opened date or included a proper label for two of eight residents (R3, R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to label a time sensitive medication with an opened date or included a proper label for two of eight residents (R3, R4). [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medication including the prescription numbers as applicable, for one of one discharged resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medication including the prescription numbers as applicable, 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; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- July 20, 2022: report LT1Y11 · 13 correction orders
Details
Survey completed July 20, 2022: 13 correction orders
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the required staffing plan was posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's eight 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 posted as required, potentially affecting the licensee's eight current residents, staff, and any visitors of the licensee. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”
- Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure and contact information for the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure and contact information for the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment as required. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”
- Tag 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 baseline testing for one of one employee
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 baseline testing for one of one employee (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 13
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content. This had the potential to impact 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 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) 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 smoke alarms in each bedroom and failed to ensure smoke alarms are interconnected so that actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling to actuate as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms in each bedroom and failed to ensure smoke alarms are interconnected so that actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling to actuate as required. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 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 observation, 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 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) 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 ensure all facility elements, including the operation of the main entrance door to allow for the free egress of residents, does not create a distinct hazard to residents and staff.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure all facility elements, including the operation of the main entrance door to allow for the free egress of residents, does not create a distinct hazard to residents and staff. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 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)-B.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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)-B. [...]”
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 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record to include all required content for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record to include 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. [...]”
- 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 included the expiration date for time sensitive medications for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications included the expiration date for time sensitive medications for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
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.
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
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 8 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 LEGACY PLACE LLC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 422144
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 8
- Licensee
- LEGACY PLACE LLC
- County
- Benton County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Susan Norman
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 1.7 mi, nursing home 2.0 mi, pharmacy 1.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Centracare - St. Cloud Hospital, Saint Cloud. 1.7 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Good Shepherd Lutheran Home, Sauk Rapids. 2.0 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Good Shepherd Home Health Care, Sauk Rapids. 2.0 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56379 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fresenius Kidney Care St. Cloud, Saint Cloud, 2.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
- Hospice
- 16 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56379.
Centracare Hospice, office in Waite Park, 4.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in St. Cloud, 5.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Saint Cloud, 8.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Allina Health System, Annandale. 22.8 miles away, straight line. 2 geriatric medicine doctors 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 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: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire relatively 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 2025. 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?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
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 relatively low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Legacy Place provide?
Legacy Place is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Sauk Rapids, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 8 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Legacy Place?
No. We publish state licensing details for Legacy Place 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 Legacy Place 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. Legacy Place does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Legacy Place?
Visit Legacy Place at 902 15th Street Ne, Sauk Rapids, MN 56379.
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