Assisted Living
Mercy Link
15684 Harmony Way, Apple Valley, MN 55124 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · MERCY LINK LLC
Mercy Link is a state-licensed assisted living community in Apple Valley, Minnesota. It is licensed for 4 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, 4 residents
Assisted Living Facility 414749, current license dated Jan 1, 2024. Licensee MERCY LINK LLC.
Nearest emergency room
2.9 miles
M Health Fairview Ridges 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercy Link this community | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Amazing Grace Care | 0.1 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Gentle Haven | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Bright Haven | 0.4 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Sunflower Homes Health | 0.4 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 21, 2022
- Evaluations on record
- 1
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 21, 2022, state report 11WS11)
MDH: “On July 19, 2022, and July 21, 2022, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 21, 2022: 11 correction orders
- Tag 450: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide current Minnesota Assisted Living Bill of Rights (BOR) for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide current Minnesota Assisted Living Bill of Rights (BOR) for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “All assisted living facilities shall: (1) distribute to residents the assisted living bill of rights; (2) provide services in a manner that complies with the Nurse Practice Act in sections 148.171 to 148.285; (3) utilize a person-centered planning and service [...]”
- 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 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 according to the Minnesota Food Code. This had the potential to affect four (4) current residents of the facility. [...]”
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 485: 144G.41 Subd 1. (13) (i) (A) and (C) 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 a menu was prepared a week in advance and provided to the residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a menu was prepared a week in advance and provided to the residents. This had the potential to affect the four (4) residents who were residing in the facility. [...]”
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 490: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (ii)-(vii) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a daily program of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs, that create opportunities for active participation in the community at large.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have a daily program of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs, that create opportunities for active participation in the community at large. This had the potential to affect all sfour (4) residents of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(ii) weekly housekeeping; (iii) weekly laundry service; (iv) upon the request of the resident, provide direct or reasonable assistance with arranging for transportation to medical and social services appointments, shopping, and other recreation, and provide [...]”
- Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) 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 (MAARC).
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 (MAARC). This had the potential to affect all of the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and e-mail contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
Show all 11
- Tag 570: 144G.42 Subdivision 1 Display of license Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) daysTIME PERIOD FOR CORRECTION: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to display the original current license at the main entrance of the assisted living facility as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to display the original current license at the main entrance of the assisted living facility as required. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “The original current license must be displayed at the main entrance of each assisted living facility. The facility must provide a copy of the license to any person who requests it.”
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) daysTIME PERIOD FOR CORRECTION: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently. This had the potential to affect the four (4) 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 [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that complied with fire protection requirements. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”
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 required plans, training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide the required plans, training, and drills for fire safety and evacuation. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”
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 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · 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 to affect the four (4) residents residing in the facility and future residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were securely secured so only authorized personnel had access.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were securely secured so only authorized personnel had access. This had the potential to affect the four (4) residents residing in the facility. [...]”
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.”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- May 2, 2024 · report HL370888344M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility failed to provide supervision to the resident. As a result, the resident overdosed on drugs.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive. The facility provided immediate assistance to the resident at the time of the drug overdose, and he recovered. However, sometime prior to the incident the resident overdosed from drugs while he was out in the community and a staff member observed the resident with drug paraphernalia. The facility lacked documentation when these instances occurred, and it was unclear if further interventions would have prevented the resident's drug overdose.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility coordinated care with the resident's case workers and provided education to facility staff.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed March 29, 2024: 4 correction orders
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, resident records lacked documentation of incidences of street drug use for one of one resident (R1) reviewed. R1 overdosed on street drugs while in the community. Also, a staff member observed R1 with drug paraphernalia while at the facility. The date and time these incidences occurred were unclear because the licensee lacked documentation of the incidences. [...]”
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 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 revise the service plan to include hourly safety checks for two of two residents (R1, R2) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to revise the service plan to include hourly safety checks for two of two residents (R1, R2) reviewed. R1 and R2 had an identified safety intervention of hourly safety checks as a result of the abuse assessment. The service was a verbal direction and there was no system in place for staff to document they completed safety checks. [...]”
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 1690: 144G.71 Subdivision 1 Medication management services Level 3, pattern scope, scope/level letter H · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a current medication administration policy and procedure plan to include Narcan, a medication used for opioid overdose, for residents (R) with illicit drug use and opioid abuse.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a current medication administration policy and procedure plan to include Narcan, a medication used for opioid overdose, for residents (R) with illicit drug use and opioid abuse. R1 and R2 overdosed in R1's room and the licensee staff found R1 unresponsive. R1 required cardio pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and assistance from emergency responders (911). Both went to the hospital. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) This section applies only to assisted living facilities that provide medication management services. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to transcribe a physician's order for staff to administer naloxone (medication used for overdose) for one of one resident (R2) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to transcribe a physician's order for staff to administer naloxone (medication used for overdose) for one of one resident (R2) reviewed. R2 overdosed on street drugs and required hospitalization. R2 returned to licensee with a physician's order for Naloxone and the licensee failed to transcribe the order four approxmiately four months. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: seven (7) 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 4 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 MERCY LINK LLC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 414749
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2024-01-01
- Licensed capacity
- 4
- Licensee
- MERCY LINK LLC
- County
- Dakota County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Faisal Jama
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 2.9 mi, nursing home 1.3 mi, pharmacy 0.7 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Ridges Hospital, Burnsville. 2.9 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Apple Valley Village Health Care Center, Apple Valley. 1.3 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Omega Home Healthcare LLC, Eagan. 4.5 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 0.7 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55124 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fresenius Medical Care - Lakeville, Lakeville, 2.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 5 of 5 stars)
Davita Burnsville Dialysis Unit, Burnsville, 2.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita East Valley Dialysis, Apple Valley, 3.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 25 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55124.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 9.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Caretenders Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 11.6 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Burnsville. 2.9 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 2024. 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 Mercy Link provide?
Mercy Link is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Apple Valley, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Mercy Link?
No. We publish state licensing details for Mercy Link 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 Mercy Link 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. Mercy Link does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Mercy Link?
Visit Mercy Link at 15684 Harmony Way, Apple Valley, MN 55124.
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