Assisted Living
Millstream Commons
210 West 8th Street, Northfield, MN 55057 · Map
Licensed for 50 residents · MILLSTREAM COMMONS
Millstream Commons is a state-licensed assisted living community in Northfield, Minnesota. It is licensed for 50 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Millstream Commons says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
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, 50 residents
Assisted Living Facility 422653, current license dated Nov 1, 2025. Licensee MILLSTREAM COMMONS.
Nearest emergency room
1.9 miles
Northfield 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Millstream Commons this community | 50 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Campus A/l | 0.6 mi | 22 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Valleyview of Northfield | 1.1 mi | 42 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Vivie Senior Living of Northfi | 1.4 mi | 140 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Elysian Senior Homes of Northf | 1.7 mi | 12 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 8, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 8, 2026, state report 28Y511)
MDH: “On July 6, 2026, through July 8, 2026 the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 8, 2026: 13 correction orders
- Tag 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include the required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include the required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record 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 one discharged resident's record (R4) included a discharge summary with the required content as required according to MN Rules 4659.0120, Subp. 9.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one discharged resident's record (R4) included a discharge summary with the required content as required according to MN Rules 4659.0120, Subp. 9. [...]”
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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- 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 · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-K and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-L).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for two of two employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-K and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-L). This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. This resulted in an immediate order on July 7, 2026. [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 13
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1700: 144G.71 Subd. 2 Provision of medication management services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident (R2) who self-administered medications was assessed for self-administration of
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident (R2) who self-administered medications was assessed for self-administration of medications. [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of three residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of three residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, a registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or qualified staff delegated the task by a registered nurse must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the [...]”
- 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 three residents (R1).
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 three residents (R1). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) trained and competency tested one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) providing medications to residents for unplanned time away from home when the licensed nurse was not available.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) trained and competency tested one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) providing medications to residents for unplanned time away from home 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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of three residents (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of three residents (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure treatment or therapies were administered as prescribed, or to document the reason they were not provided, for one of three residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure treatment or therapies were administered as prescribed, or to document the reason they were not provided, for one of three residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”
- Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for one of three residents (R1) receiving treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for one of three residents (R1) receiving treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 810 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (b-F) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $2,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 27, 2024: report Y8D211 · 5 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 27, 2024: 5 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements 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) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation for the licensee's one resident (R3) who was hospitalized.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation for the licensee's one resident (R3) who was hospitalized. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was affiliated with the assisted living license for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was affiliated with the assisted living license for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
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 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened for two of three residents with insulin (R8, R9).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened for two of three residents with insulin (R8, R9). [...]”
Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”
- Tag 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of three residents who received blood glucose monitoring (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of three residents who received blood glucose monitoring (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “Ordered or prescribed treatments or therapies must be administered by a nurse, physician, or other licensed health professional authorized to perform the treatment or therapy, or may be delegated or assigned to unlicensed personnel by the licensed health [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 24, 2025 · report HL304906326M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “Facility staff neglected the resident when they failed to perform a 2:00 a.m. safety check according to the resident's plan of care. The resident was found on his bedroom floor the next morning by his caregiver. After complaining of back pain for hours, the resident's family transported him to the hospital where he was diagnosed with five fractured ribs.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“Alleged perpetrator (AP#1), and AP#2 were responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. Alleged perpetrator (AP#1), and AP#2 were responsible for the maltreatment. Although AP#1 (unlicensed personnel) told the previous shift unlicensed personnel she would complete the resident's evening personal cares, AP #1 failed to assist the resident according to his care plan needs. In addition, AP#2 a facility licensed staff, failed to monitor and assess the resident after he received injuries to his back and left elbow after his fall. The resident complained of back pain the entire day into the evening until family arranged for the resident to be evaluated at a hospital. The resident was diagnosed with five rib fractures and admitted to the hospital.”
Action taken by facility: “AP#1 received a written warning from facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed December 31, 2024: 2 correction orders
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-I performed scheduled services for one of two residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-I performed scheduled services for one of two residents (R1) with records reviewed. On October 6, 2024, at 9:00 p.m. and October 7, 2024 at 2:00 a.m., ULP-I and ULP-F were to assist R1 with his personal cares and ensure R1's dirty clothes were picked up and clean clothes laid out for the morning both falsely documented the services were performed. [...]”
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 reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and individual persons were 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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
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 50 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 MILLSTREAM COMMONS
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 422653
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-11-01
- Licensed capacity
- 50
- Licensee
- MILLSTREAM COMMONS
- County
- Rice County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Cami Peterson-Devries
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 1.9 mi, nursing home 0.6 mi, pharmacy 0.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Northfield Hospital, Northfield. 1.9 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Three Links Care Center, Northfield. 0.6 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Rice County Phns, Faribault. 12.2 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Family Fare Pharmacy. 0.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55057 as micropolitan (micropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Northfield At Home, Northfield, 1.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 1 of 5 stars)
Fmc - Cannon Valley, Dundas, 5.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Faribault Dialysis Unit, Faribault, 12.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 13 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55057.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 17.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Southern Cities Clinic, Faribault. 12.2 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 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 moderate, wildfire very low, tornado very 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 state recorded a finding in February 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
- Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
- For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Millstream Commons provide?
Millstream Commons is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Northfield, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 50 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Millstream Commons?
No. We publish state licensing details for Millstream Commons 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 Millstream Commons 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. Millstream Commons does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Millstream Commons?
Use Millstream Commons's website, sfhs.org/communities/millstream-commons, or visit at 210 West 8th Street, Northfield, MN 55057.
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