Lilisity

Assisted Living and Memory Care

Marywood

915 Kenwood Avenue, Duluth, MN 55811 · Map
Licensed for 48 residents · MARYWOOD

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Marywood is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Duluth, Minnesota. It is licensed for 48 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care
48 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care
$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

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.
Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

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.

State inspections

1Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Jan 9, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 48 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 424654, current license dated May 1, 2026. Licensee MARYWOOD.

Nearest emergency room

1.3 miles

St Lukes 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.

CommunityDistanceLicensed capacityPublished starting priceLicenseInspection citations
Marywood this community48Not publishedActive1 substantiated
Westwood of Duluth0.0 mi120Not publishedActive1 substantiated
Benet Hall0.1 mi15Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Anne's Place0.5 mi3Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Pines III Assisted Living1.4 mi61Not publishedActive0 substantiated
State inspection record1 substantiated
Last evaluation
January 9, 2025
Evaluations on record
2
Investigations substantiated
1 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
2 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (January 9, 2025, state report 290J11)

MDH: “On January 6, 2025, through January 9, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed January 9, 2025: 8 correction orders

  • Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”

  • Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 (a) Staff records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained the required content for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained the required content for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid staff member, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”

  • Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the provider established and maintained a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included ensuring the completion of a two-step TST's (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screenings such as a blood test was completed for one of three employees, (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”

  • Tag 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 keep the facility in compliance with the

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to keep the facility in compliance with the Minnesota Fire Code. The deficient conditions have 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 [...]”

  • Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop the fire

    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 the licensee failed to document required fire safety evacuation training for employees and residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”

Show all 8
  • Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure background studies

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure background studies (BGS) were submitted and a clearance received in affiliation with the assisted living licensee's current health facility identification (HFID) for four of eight on-call employees (registered nurse (RN)-J, RN-K, RN-L, RN-N). This had the potential to affect all 45 residents. [...]”

    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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included a signature or other authentication by the resident and/or resident's representative to document agreement on the services to be provided for one of three residents (R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included a signature or other authentication by the resident and/or resident's representative to document agreement on the services to be provided for one of three residents (R3). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”

  • Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained to include the opened and/or expiration date for time sensitive medications administer by the licensee for one of three residents (R3).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained to include the opened and/or expiration date for time sensitive medications administer by the licensee for one of three residents (R3). [...]”

    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.

Earlier evaluations (1)
  • May 6, 2022: report EVST11 · 22 correction orders
    Details

    Survey completed May 6, 2022: 22 correction orders

    • Tag 110: 144G.10 Subdivision 1a Assisted living director license required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2)
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed as the Director of Record with the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports (BELTSS).

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed as the Director of Record with the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports (BELTSS). 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 500: 144G.41 Subd. 2 Policies and procedures Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to show they had met the requirements of licensure, by attesting the managerial officials who were in charge of the day-to-day operations, had developed and implemented current policies and procedures, as required, with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to show they had met the requirements of licensure, by attesting the managerial officials who were in charge of the day-to-day operations, had developed and implemented current policies and procedures, as required, with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must have policies and procedures in place to address the following and keep them current: (1) requirements in section 626.557, reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults; (2) conducting and handling background studies on [...]”

    • 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 (registered nurse (RN)-B, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F) observed to administer insulin and perform blood glucose testing.

      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 (registered nurse (RN)-B, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F) observed to administer insulin and perform blood glucose testing. [...]”

      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 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

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, 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 of 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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with the required content.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving services under the assisted living license, 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 22
    • Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one discharged resident (R5) with record reviewed.

      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 (R5) with record reviewed. [...]”

      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 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 two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual began working for the licensee for one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services for three of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-B, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-G) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services for three of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-B, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-G) with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff completed the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame for one of three employees

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff completed the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”

    • Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) assessed two of two residents (R2, R4) with falls, for causative factors

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) assessed two of two residents (R2, R4) with falls, for causative factors to determine individualized interventions to reduce the resident's risk for injury and failed to ensure the RN completed a comprehensive reassessment no more than 14 days after the initiation of services, for one of four residents (R4) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”

    • Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included a signature or other authentication by the resident and the facility to document agreement on the services to be provided for one of four residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 1700: 144G.71 Subd. 2 Provision of medication management services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted an individualized assessment with the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3 and R4) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted an individualized assessment with the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3 and R4) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) For each resident who requests medication management services, the facility shall, prior to providing medication management services, have a registered nurse, licensed health professional, or authorized prescriber under section 151.37 conduct an [...]”

    • Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management record with the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3 and R4) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management record with the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3 and R4) with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure as needed (PRN) medications had parameters for administration for one of four residents (R1) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure as needed (PRN) medications had parameters for administration for one of four residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”

    • Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed for one of four residents (R3) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed for one of four residents (R3) with records reviewed. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure insulin was administered per the manufacturer's instructions for two of two residents (R8, R9) observed during insulin administration. [...]”

      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 1830: 144G.71 Subd. 14 Renewal of prescriptions Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for two of four residents (R3 and R2) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for two of four residents (R3 and R2) with records reviewed. 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 pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the [...]”

      Rule cited: “Prescriptions must be renewed at least every 12 months or more frequently as indicated by the assessment in subdivision 2. Prescriptions for controlled substances must comply with chapter 152.”

    • 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 secure and permitted only authorized personnel access, for one of three medication storage cupboards (R2's room) during observation of medication storage.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were secure and permitted only authorized personnel access, for one of three medication storage cupboards (R2's room) during observation of medication storage. [...]”

      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 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 medications as required for one of one resident (R5) upon discharge, with records reviewed.

      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 medications as required for one of one resident (R5) upon discharge, with records reviewed. [...]”

      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. [...]”

    • Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7)
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review the licensee failed to ensure clarification of prescriber orders for one of three residents (R3) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

    • Tag 2260: 144G.90 Subd. 3 Notice of dementia training Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide in written or electronic form to residents, families, or other persons who request it, a description of the dementia care training program, the categories of employees trained, the frequency of training, and the basic topics covered with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide in written or electronic form to residents, families, or other persons who request it, a description of the dementia care training program, the categories of employees trained, the frequency of training, and the basic topics covered with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care shall make available in written or electronic form, to residents and families or other persons who request it, a description of the training program and related training it provides, including the categories of [...]”

    • Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for three of three residents (R2, R3 and R4) with bedrails (used interchangeably with siderails), with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for three of three residents (R2, R3 and R4) with bedrails (used interchangeably with siderails), with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 3070: 144.6502, Subd. 6 Form Requirements Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to obtain consent for electronic monitoring for two of three residents (R6 and R2) who had an electronic monitoring device in place.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to obtain consent for electronic monitoring for two of three residents (R6 and R2) who had an electronic monitoring device in place. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Subd. 6.Form requirements. (b) Facilities must make the notification and consent form available to the residents and inform residents of their option to conduct electronic monitoring of their rooms or private living unit.”

    From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

    Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,500.00.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

  • February 11, 2025 · report HL310687482M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The resident was neglected when the facility failed to provide appropriate care and services for end-of-life care and pressure ulcers. The resident was found lying with dried incontinent bowel movement (BM) stuck to her body, and new pressure ulcers.”

    “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 resident was bedridden, actively dying, and dependent on staff for mobility and incontinence care every 2 hours. The resident received a suppository on the evening shift and staff failed to assist the resident with incontinence care for 7 hours. In addition, the facility failed to provide weekly pressure ulcer monitoring as assessed and failed to implement interventions including repositioning to help prevent new or worsening pressure ulcers. The resident's coccyx pressure ulcer worsened, and the resident developed new pressure ulcers on her scapula and foot.”

    Action taken by facility: “The facility interviewed staff about the incident.”

    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 January 3, 2025: 4 correction orders

    • Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to comply with the requirements for reporting maltreatment for one of one vulnerable adults (R1) after a licensee nurse, and hospice nurse reported concern that incontinence care and repositioning were neglected for R1 resulting in a new pressure ulcer. The licensee failed to identify any neglect and subsequently failed to report the concern of maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC). [...]”

      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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7)
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to ensure the resident record had required information including: relevant health information, documentation of significant changes in the resident status/condition, incidents involving the resident, actions taken in response to the needs of the resident, services provided as assessed/indicated in an up to date service plan, and according to accepted health care standards for one of one resident's (R1) who was bed bound and received [...]”

      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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed assess, monitor, and ensure interventions were implemented according to and up to date service plan and accepted health care standards for one of one resident's (R1) who was bed bound and received hospice end of life care with a coccyx pressure ulcer. Harm occurred for R1 when she was found lying in incontinent fecal matter that had dried onto R1's body after staff failed to provide incontinence care or repositioning for 7 hours. [...]”

      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 licensee failed to ensure one of one residents (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews and document review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one residents (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment. R1 was neglected. 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.”

Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
  • April 22, 2026 · report HL310681040M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when the AP physically restrained the resident into her wheelchair using a transfer belt.”

    “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated.”

    Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse not substantiated.

    MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated. Although the AP restrained the resident to her wheelchair with a transfer belt, the error was an isolated incident, and no harm occurred to the resident. The resident was observed on facility video surveillance restrained to her wheelchair with the transfer belt for about one hour. During that time the resident had no signs or symptoms of distress observed. When staff noticed the resident was restrained, they removed the transfer belt and reported the incident. When interviewed the AP admitted restraining the resident to her wheelchair and denied any malicious intent but rather intended to keep the resident safe. All staff were re-educated on use of restraints.”

    Action taken by facility: “Facility staff removed the restraint, reported the incident and the AP was suspended pending investigation into the incident. All staff were re-educated on what constitutes a restraint, the prohibited use of restraints, and the resident's right to be free from restraints.”

    Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

    Survey completed February 17, 2026: no correction orders issued.

  • January 8, 2026 · report HL310686582M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
    Details

    Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility failed to ensure the resident had adequate pain management. As a result, the resident experienced unmanageable pain.”

    “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”

    Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.

    MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. While unlicensed personnel (ULP) had technical difficulty in how they viewed the resident's electronic medication administration record (eMAR) throughout a weekend, the eMAR was still accessible, and records indicated the ULPs' administered the resident's pain medication as ordered. In addition, as the resident's pain medication increased throughout the weekend, the facility implemented orders, and the resident received pain medications.”

    Action taken by facility: “When unlicensed staff members contacted the on-call nurse throughout the weekend, on-call nurses spoke to the staff members and provided instruction.”

    Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”

    Survey completed December 2, 2025: no correction orders issued.

What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)

Level 1: “a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect health or safety”

Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”

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 48 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 MARYWOOD
License type
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number
424654
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-05-01
Licensed capacity
48
Licensee
MARYWOOD
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Penelope Viggiano

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 1.3 mi, nursing home 0.0 mi, pharmacy 1.3 mi
Nearest hospital with an emergency room
St Lukes Hospital, Duluth. 1.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
Nearest Medicare nursing home
Benedictine Health Center, Duluth. 0.0 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office
Benedictine Home Health Duluth, Duluth. 0.0 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy
Walgreens. 1.3 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area
USDA classes ZIP code 55811 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
Dialysis within 15 miles
Fmc Dialysis Services Of Spirit Valley, Duluth, 5.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Miller Hill, Hermantown, 6.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Hospice
9 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55811.
Aspirus St. Luke'S At Home-Hospice-Duluth, office in Duluth, 1.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Essentia Health St Mary'S Hospice & Palliative Care Services, office in Duluth, 1.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Caringedge Hospice Hermantown, office in Hermantown, 4.0 miles away, straight line
Nearest geriatric medicine practice
Polinsky Medical Rehabilitation Center, Duluth. 6.0 miles away, straight line. 3 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 moderate, wildfire very low, tornado relatively 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.

  1. The state recorded a finding in February 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
  2. The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
  3. What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
  4. How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
  5. What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
  6. How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
  7. How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
  8. What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
  9. What fees are charged at move-in?
  10. 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.

SourceData as ofWhat we found
Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection recordsSep 28, 2026See above
U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour casesOct 15, 2026Nothing on record
OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016Oct 15, 2026Nothing on record
FEMA flood mapSee above
USDA wildfire riskApr 15, 2026Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low
FEMA National Risk IndexSee above
CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmaciesSee above
HUD Multifamily Properties - AssistedJul 6, 2026Nothing on record
State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory)Sep 20, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Hospice - General InformationAug 19, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Home Health Care AgenciesMay 27, 2026Nothing on record
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Marywood provide?

Marywood is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Duluth, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 48 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Marywood?

No. We publish state licensing details for Marywood 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 Marywood 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. Marywood does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Marywood?

Visit Marywood at 915 Kenwood Avenue, Duluth, MN 55811.

Choosing assisted livingOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

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