Assisted Living
Miles Vents Incorporated
5336 Sailor Lane, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · MILES VENTS INCORPORATED
Miles Vents Incorporated is a state-licensed assisted living community in Brooklyn Center, 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 423912, current license dated Mar 1, 2026. Licensee MILES VENTS INCORPORATED.
Nearest emergency room
3.1 miles
North Memorial Health Hospital, rated 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miles Vents Incorporated this community | 4 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Abundance Home Care | 0.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Aspire Aid Healthcare | 0.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Vaimar Suites | 0.1 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Wright Way Home Care | 0.1 mi | 3 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- August 29, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 1
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (August 29, 2024, state report YV5111)
MDH: “On August 26, 2024, through August 29, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed August 29, 2024: 11 correction orders
- 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 daily programs of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have daily programs of social and recreational activities based on individual and group interests, physical, mental, and psychosocial needs. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(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 the name of or other identifying information about the [...]”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
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 restroom use by all staff, residents, and visitors.
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 restroom use by all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
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 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) documented training and competencies for one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-B) who would provide medications for residents with unplanned time away from home when a licensed nurse was not available.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) documented training and competencies for one of one unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-B) who would provide medications for residents with unplanned time away from home when a licensed nurse was not available. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid employee, 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 maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The licensee failed to ensure screening for active TB (either a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or blood test) were completed and documented for one of two employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-D). [...]”
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 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 (EPP) with all the required content in.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content in. 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 11
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 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 one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) received the required dementia care training.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B) received the required dementia care training. 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 [...]”
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 1560: 144G.64 (a, b, c) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED 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 requested it, the dementia care training program with the required content.
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 requested it, the dementia care training program with the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(5) new employees may satisfy the initial training requirements by producing written proof of previously completed required training within the past 18 months. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident's (R2) service plan were revised to include current needs based on the nursing assessment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident's (R2) service plan were revised to include current needs based on the nursing assessment. [...]”
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 medication administration was documented accurately for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medication administration was documented accurately 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, 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 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will 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) developed comprehensive written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed comprehensive written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”
- Tag 1820: 144G.71 Subd. 13 Prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of one resident (R2) receiving medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of one resident (R2) receiving medication management services. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- March 10, 2025 · report HL369259162M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when they failed to check the resident's room after she did not return from an outing. The facility waited five days to file a missing person's report or notify the state agency. Three weeks later the facility opened the residents room door and found her deceased.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility was aware the resident was using illicit drugs and used the bedroom window to come in and go out of the facility, however, the facility failed to train staff to recognize potential substance use, failed to implement new interventions to mitigate the risk of the substance use, and failed to develop interventions related to the resident using her window as an entrance/exit. When the resident appeared to be missing, facility staff did not open the resident's room to check if the resident had returned via the window, for several weeks. A staff and a resident recalled the facility was particularly cold for several weeks before anyone entered the resident's room to check for an open window. [...]”
Action taken by facility: “The facility planned to educate staff on signs and symptoms of drug use.”
Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed February 14, 2025: 3 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
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to immediately report suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC), when R1 failed to return from an outing.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to immediately report suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC), when R1 failed to return from an outing. The licensee failed to follow their policy for a missing resident when they failed to promptly organize a search, notify law enforcement, and/or file a MAARC report. The facility also failed to file a report with MAARC when staff discovered R1 deceased in her bedroom. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide appropriate care and services for one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to provide appropriate care and services for one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment. R1 had a history of substance use disorder (amphetamines and opioids), documented use of amphetamines, opioids, fentanyl, and THC in recent drug screens. The licensee failed to update R1's service plan and individual abuse prevention plan to include interventions related to drug use and failed to train staff on recognizing drug use. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 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
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- May 16, 2024 · report HL369258384M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when staff failed to provide supervision after the resident requested a razor and was able to harm herself.”
“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. The resident's care plan was followed at the time of the incident. Although staff provided the resident with a razor, at the time of the incident, the resident was able to utilize a razor independently without staff's supervision.”
Action taken by facility: “Following the incident, additional safety interventions were implemented, and facility staff received additional training.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed April 1, 2024: 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 4: “a violation harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury or death, or a violation that was likely to lead to serious injury or death”
Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”
Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”
Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”
Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.
What these terms mean
MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”
“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”
For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).
Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.
MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 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 MILES VENTS INCORPORATED
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 423912
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-03-01
- Licensed capacity
- 4
- Licensee
- MILES VENTS INCORPORATED
- County
- Hennepin County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Tobi Agene
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 3.1 mi, nursing home 2.0 mi, pharmacy 3.1 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- North Memorial Health Hospital, Robbinsdale. 3.1 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 1 of 5 stars. Location approximate.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Good Samaritan Society - Specialty Care Community, Robbinsdale. 2.0 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Aplus Health Care LLC, Minneapolis. 1.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Hy-Vee Pharmacy. 3.1 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55429 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fresenius Kidney Care Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Center, 1.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fkc - Robbinsdale Dialysis, Robbinsdale, 1.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Davita Robbinsdale Dialysis, Robbinsdale, 2.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 22 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55429.
North Memorial Home Hlth Hospc, office in Robbinsdale, 2.4 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Golden Valley, 4.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 1 of 5 stars)
Grace Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 5.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Hennepin Healthcare System Inc, Brooklyn Park. 3.1 miles away, straight line. 2 geriatric medicine doctors listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively moderate; 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 moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively high, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively high, 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 state recorded a finding in March 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- 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?
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 Miles Vents Incorporated provide?
Miles Vents Incorporated is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Miles Vents Incorporated?
No. We publish state licensing details for Miles Vents Incorporated 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 Miles Vents Incorporated cost?
Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Miles Vents Incorporated does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Miles Vents Incorporated?
Visit Miles Vents Incorporated at 5336 Sailor Lane, Brooklyn Center, MN 55429.
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