Assisted Living and Memory Care
Lilydale Senior Living
949 Sibley Memorial Highway, Lilydale, MN 55118 · Map
Licensed for 135 residents · LILYDALE SENIOR LIVING
Lilydale Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Lilydale, Minnesota. It is licensed for 135 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
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Lilydale Senior Living says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Offers hospice care on site or works with hospice providers.
Thanks for being welcoming to me - the hospice volunteer…
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026)
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, 135 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 421910, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee LILYDALE SENIOR LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
3.1 miles
Allina United Hospital, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lilydale Senior Living this community | 135 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Lexington Landing | 1.1 mi | 64 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Bentson Family Assisted Living | 1.1 mi | 66 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Shepherd Senior Housing | 1.5 mi | 64 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated |
| Mendota Heights Wp | 1.6 mi | 46 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- March 12, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (March 12, 2025, state report OM7S11)
MDH: “On March 10, 2025, through March 12, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed March 12, 2025: 4 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
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 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 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 with dementia care license for one of 59 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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 with dementia care license for one of 59 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on March 11, 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 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 conduct a comprehensive reassessment with a change of condition for one of four residents (R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct a comprehensive reassessment with a change of condition for one of four residents (R6). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure nurse delegated procedures were followed by one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure nurse delegated procedures were followed by one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) observed during medication administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- October 5, 2022: report YMUV11 · 9 correction orders
Details
Survey completed October 5, 2022: 9 correction orders
- 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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G, ULP-F)) observed to provide personal cares and medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G, ULP-F)) observed to provide personal cares and medication administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 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 the required smoke alarm located outside within the immediate vicinity of a bedroom in apartment unit 405 and the interconnection of smoke alarms in apartment units 305, 302, and 105.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required smoke alarm located outside within the immediate vicinity of a bedroom in apartment unit 405 and the interconnection of smoke alarms in apartment units 305, 302, and 105. This has the potential to directly affect 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 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 complete content on the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum frequency of employee evacuation drills, and the minimum required staff training on fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide the complete content on the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum frequency of employee evacuation drills, and the minimum required staff training on fire safety and evacuation. This has the potential to directly affect the safety of visitors, staff, and all residents receiving care. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 970: 144.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. This practice resulted in a level one violation 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 of the residents). [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
Show all 9
- Tag 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (a) Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-G) received the required training/competency testing.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-G) received the required training/competency testing. [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were properly secured for only authorized personnel for one of two residents (R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were properly secured for only authorized personnel for one of two residents (R5). [...]”
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 expired medications were properly disposed of which had the potential to affect all residents receiving medication management.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure expired medications were properly disposed of which had the potential to affect all residents receiving medication management. [...]”
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 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 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 a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm. This has the potential to directly affect staff, visitors, and all memory care residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
- 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
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 17, 2023 · report HL290184363M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when a bed rail was placed on the resident's bed without appropriate assessment and follow-up. The resident became entangled in the bed rail and died.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility failed to ensure the residents bed rail was assessed and determined to be safe for the resident. The resident was found deceased entrapped in the bedrail.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed side rails assessments for all residents utilizing siderails. A maintenance schedule was implemented to check siderails according to specific manufacture recommendations. Risk vs benefits of siderails were completed, individualized, and reviewed with family and/or residents.”
Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed February 13, 2023: 4 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to report sufficient data to the common entry point (CEP) regarding an incident which occurred involving one of one residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report sufficient data to the common entry point (CEP) regarding an incident which occurred involving one of one residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 4, widespread scope, scope/level letter L · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical, or nursing standards for fifteen of fifteen residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, R14, R15) who utilized bed rails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the facility failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical, or nursing standards for fifteen of fifteen residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, R14, R15) who utilized bed rails. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 3020: 626.557 Subd. 4 Reporting Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to report sufficient data to the common entry point (CEP) regarding an incident which occurred involving one of one residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to report sufficient data to the common entry point (CEP) regarding an incident which occurred involving one of one residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a mandated reporter shall immediately make an oral report to the common entry point. The common entry point may accept electronic reports submitted through a web-based reporting system established by the commissioner. [...]”
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) 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”
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”
Level 4: “a violation harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury or death, or a violation that was likely to lead to serious injury 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 135 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 LILYDALE SENIOR LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 421910
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 135
- Licensee
- LILYDALE SENIOR LIVING
- County
- Dakota County
- Residence Director
- Jaime Lynch
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.
Residence Director name from public records we reviewed, as of Oct 12, 2026.
Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs
How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota
- Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)
Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 3.1 mi, nursing home 1.1 mi, pharmacy 1.5 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Allina United Hospital, Saint Paul. 3.1 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Shirley Chapman Sholom Home East, Saint Paul. 1.1 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Sholom Home Care, Saint Paul. 1.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.5 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55118 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Highland Park Dialysis, Saint Paul, 1.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita West St Paul Dialysis Unit, West St Paul, 2.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc - West St Paul Dialysis, West St Paul, 2.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 27 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55118.
Sholom Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 1.1 miles away, straight line
Our Lady Of Peace Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 4.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Accentcare Fairview Hospice - West, LLC, office in Saint Paul, 5.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 2 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 3.8 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 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 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 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Lilydale Senior Living provide?
Lilydale Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Lilydale, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 135 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Lilydale Senior Living?
No. We publish state licensing details for Lilydale Senior Living 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 Lilydale Senior Living 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. Lilydale Senior Living does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Lilydale Senior Living?
Use Lilydale Senior Living's website, lilydaleseniorliving.com, or visit at 949 Sibley Memorial Highway, Lilydale, MN 55118.
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