Assisted Living
Maplewood Care Residence
2338 Overlook Circle, Maplewood, MN 55119 · Map
Licensed for 6 residents · MAPLEWOOD CARE RESIDENCE
Maplewood Care Residence is a state-licensed assisted living community in Maplewood, Minnesota. It is licensed for 6 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, 6 residents
Assisted Living Facility 425376, current license dated Jun 29, 2026. Licensee MAPLEWOOD CARE RESIDENCE.
Nearest emergency room
1.7 miles
M Health Fairview Woodwinds 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maplewood Care Residence this community | 6 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Serenity Living Care | 0.2 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Scenic Hills Alternative Care, 2197 Bonnie Lane | 0.4 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Scenic Hills Alternative Care, 2187 Bonnie Lane | 0.4 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Scenic Hills Alternative Care, Snowshoe Lane | 0.5 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- March 6, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (March 6, 2025, state report 62X211)
MDH: “On March 3, 2025, through March 6, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed March 6, 2025: 10 correction orders
- Tag 110: 144G.10 Subdivision 1a Assisted living director license required Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed with the Board of Executives for Long-term Services and Supports (BELTSS) as the Director of Record (DOR) for the licensee.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed with the Board of Executives for Long-term Services and Supports (BELTSS) as the Director of Record (DOR) for the licensee. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must employ an assisted living director licensed or permitted by the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports.”
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop, review, and implement a staffing plan at least twice a year, to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents, potentially affecting all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop, review, and implement a staffing plan at least twice a year, to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents, potentially affecting all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 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, including the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure, including the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and email contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- 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 affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”
Show all 10
- 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
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed with all required content for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed with all required content for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include all required content for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include all required content for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees had completed at least eight (8) hours of initial dementia training within 160 working hours of the employment start date for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees had completed at least eight (8) hours of initial dementia training within 160 working hours of the employment start date for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-C, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
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 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 current written service plan was revised and included a signature or other authentication by the facility and by the resident, or their representative, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a current written service plan was revised and included a signature or other authentication by the facility and by the resident, or their representative, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of one resident (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. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per physician's orders for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per physician's orders for one of one resident (R2). 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 an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the [...]”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- April 13, 2023: report IZ0Z11 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed April 13, 2023: 10 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: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- 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; as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center.
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; as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and email contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- Tag 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2)-(3) 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 maintain the required portable fire extinguisher in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code as required by MN Statute 144G.45 subd.2(a)(2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the required portable fire extinguisher in accordance with the Minnesota State Fire Code as required by MN Statute 144G.45 subd.2(a)(2). This had the potential to directly affect the safety of the residents and staff. [...]”
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 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation. This has the potential to directly affect the health, safety, and well-being of all residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the required complete documentation on fire safety and evacuation plans and evacuation drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on the interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide the required complete documentation on fire safety and evacuation plans and evacuation drills. This has the potential to directly affect the safety of all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 10
- Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure physical facility elements did not constitute a distinct hazard to life. The licensee failed to provide resident bedroom # 6 with the minimum window opening meeting the minimum state standard for egress. This affected the occupied resident bedroom #6 on the lower-level floor. [...]”
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 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident or the resident's designated representative for one of one resident (R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted a comprehensive reassessment after a change of condition for two of two residents (R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted a comprehensive reassessment after a change of condition for two of two residents (R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per prescriber orders for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered per prescriber orders for one of one resident (R1). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected [...]”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
- 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 dispose of expired medications for two of two residents (R1,R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to dispose of expired medications for two of two residents (R1,R3). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited [...]”
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.
- 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
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”
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 6 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 MAPLEWOOD CARE RESIDENCE
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 425376
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-06-29
- Licensed capacity
- 6
- Licensee
- MAPLEWOOD CARE RESIDENCE
- County
- Ramsey County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Lafawn Kibble
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 1.8 mi, pharmacy 2.7 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, Woodbury. 1.7 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Woodbury Health Care Center, Woodbury. 1.8 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Careaparent, Woodbury. 1.9 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 2.7 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55119 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Woodbury Dialysis, Woodbury, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Woodbury, Woodbury, 2.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Sun Ray Dialysis Unit, Saint Paul, 3.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 25 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55119.
Hospice Of The Midwest, office in Woodbury, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in Oakdale, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Sholom Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 6.9 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 8.8 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 moderate, heat wave relatively moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- Who is here at night? Are they awake, or asleep and on call?
- Who covers when the owner is sick, on vacation, or away for the day? Can we meet them?
- Is it one flat rate, or does it rise with care needs?
- Can you help someone who needs two people to move, or a mechanical lift?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- 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 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 Maplewood Care Residence provide?
Maplewood Care Residence is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Maplewood, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 6 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Maplewood Care Residence?
No. We publish state licensing details for Maplewood Care Residence 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 Maplewood Care Residence 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. Maplewood Care Residence does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Maplewood Care Residence?
Visit Maplewood Care Residence at 2338 Overlook Circle, Maplewood, MN 55119.
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