Independent Living and Assisted Living and Memory Care
New Perspective Woodbury
2195 Century Avenue South, Woodbury, MN 55125 · Map
Licensed for 85 residents · NEW PERSPECTIVE WOODBURY
New Perspective Woodbury is a state-licensed independent living, assisted living, memory care community in Woodbury, Minnesota. It is licensed for 85 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
Starting prices the community publishes, with the date we checked each one and a link to where it is published. Care charges are usually added after an assessment.
| Care | Starting at | Checked |
|---|---|---|
| Independent Living | $2,705 /mo | Oct 12, 2026 |
| Assisted Living | $2,705 /mo | Oct 12, 2026 |
| Memory Care | $3,770 /mo | Oct 12, 2026 |
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What New Perspective Woodbury says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Has a separate memory care unit, wing or neighborhood.
If more support ever becomes helpful, our assisted living and memory care neighborhoods are right here, so you or your loved one can settle in without wondering what comes next.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Offers respite or short-term stays.
Respite Care
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Provides transportation.
Transportation
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - 3 meals a day.
Three meals daily, plus snacks and special events
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Pets allowed.
Pet-friendly community
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Apartment types named: studio, two-bedroom.
Floor plan styles (studio, one- and two-bedroom) vary by location.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026)
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, 85 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 424618, current license dated Mar 1, 2026. Licensee NEW PERSPECTIVE WOODBURY.
Nearest emergency room
0.3 miles
M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, rated 4 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New Perspective Woodbury this community | 85 | $2,705/mo | Active | 2 substantiated | |
| The Blessed Home Care | 0.7 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Guidance Healthcare | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Caring Nest Home Health | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Accessible Assisted Living | 1.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- December 19, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (December 19, 2025, state report MMEK11)
MDH: “On December 15, 2025, through December 19, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a change of ownership (CHOW) survey at the above provider, and the following orders are issued.”
Survey completed December 19, 2025: 4 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 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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 one of three residents (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include the required content for one of three residents (R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- 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 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing resident monitoring and reassessment including a reassessment no more than 14 calendar days from the start of services for one of four residents (R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing resident monitoring and reassessment including a reassessment no more than 14 calendar days from the start of services for one of four residents (R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- September 15, 2022: report YXNQ11 · 12 correction orders
Details
Survey completed September 15, 2022: 12 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
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 had the potential to affect all 70 residents of the assisted living with dementia care 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 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 effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control and current recommendations for COVID-19.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control and current recommendations for COVID-19. The licensee failed to ensure appropriate personal protective equipment was worn for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C), when observed to deliver cares to residents. [...]”
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 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) 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 comply with the requirements for reporting suspected maltreatment for one of five residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements for reporting suspected maltreatment for one of five residents (R2). The facility was aware of the incident but did not report the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC). [...]”
Rule cited: “144G.42 Subd. 6. Compliance with requirements for reporting maltreatment of vulnerable adults; abuse prevention plan. (a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review the licensee failed to have a written emergency disaster preparedness plan with all the required content and failed to post an emergency preparedness plan prominently. This had the potential to affect all seventy (70) residents receiving services under the assisted living with dementia care license. [...]”
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: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide interconnection of smoke alarms in apartment units 136 and 203.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide interconnection of smoke alarms in apartment units 136 and 203. This has the potential to directly affect residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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) [...]”
Show all 12
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation. This has the potential to directly affect the health, safety, and well-being of all residents, visitors, and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the complete content on the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum frequency of employee fire safety and evacuation drills, and the minimum required staff training on fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide the complete content on the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum frequency of employee fire safety and evacuation drills, and the minimum required staff training on fire safety and evacuation. This has the potential to directly affect the safety of visitors, staff, and all residents receiving care. [...]”
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 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the residency agreement did not include language waiving the licensee'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 residency agreement did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all 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 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 specific written instructions were documented in one of one resident's (R5) record who received oxygen therapy.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure specific written instructions were documented in one of one resident's (R5) record who received oxygen therapy. [...]”
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 [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 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 a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, document review, and interview, the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm. This has the potential to directly affect staff, visitors, and all memory care residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2290: 144G.91 Subd. 2 Legislative intent Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee limited the rights of one of one resident (R7) reviewed when the licensee required the residents or their representatives to sign a risk agreement waiving the licensee's liability regarding the use of bed rails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee limited the rights of one of one resident (R7) reviewed when the licensee required the residents or their representatives to sign a risk agreement waiving the licensee's liability regarding the use of bed rails. [...]”
Rule cited: “The rights established under this section for the benefit of residents do not limit any other rights available under law. [...]”
- Tag 3000: 626.557 Subd. 3 Timing of report Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements for reporting suspected maltreatment for one of five residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements for reporting suspected maltreatment for one of five residents (R2). The facility was aware of the incident but did not report the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”
MDH letters in this report
- February 14, 2023: Notice Of Removal Of Conditional License
- October 26, 2022: Notice Of Conditional License
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is not in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- January 14, 2025 · report HL317336905M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when insulin was not given per order causing hospitalization.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated with facility responsibility.”
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 with facility responsibility. While it was true the resident did miss doses of long-acting insulin due to a pharmacy error this did not result in neglect. However, the facility did neglect the resident when unlicensed caregivers were not provided with sufficient instructions for the administration of short-acting insulin resulting in two instances of hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) and hospitalization.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and provided additional education to unlicensed care givers.”
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 December 17, 2024: 2 correction orders
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions in the record for one of one resident (R1) receiving insulin whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and document review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions in the record for one of one resident (R1) receiving insulin whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel. [...]”
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 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 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
- September 13, 2022 · report HL31733001M
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- January 23, 2023 · report HL317332662M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when the resident fell in his room after slipping on wet carpet caused by a leaking air conditioning unit. The resident subsequently suffered spinal nerve damage requiring surgery.”
“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 resident had a fall in his room which resulted in injury. However, it could not be determined if the residents fall was directly related to the water leaking from the resident's air conditioning unit. The resident had a history of falls and documentation indicated the residents individualized plan of care was in place at the time of the fall.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility replaced the broken air conditioning unit.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed December 28, 2022: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- January 2, 2025 · report HL317336101M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when bowel medications were not given, and the resident went several days without a bowel movement and experienced increased 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. The facility coordinated care with and followed the orders and plan of care developed by the hospice provider responsible for the resident's symptom management.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility notified the hospice provider of resident updates and changes in condition.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed December 17, 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 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 85 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 NEW PERSPECTIVE WOODBURY
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 424618
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-03-01
- Licensed capacity
- 85
- Licensee
- NEW PERSPECTIVE WOODBURY
- County
- Washington County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Kate Ryg
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 0.3 mi, nursing home 1.2 mi, pharmacy 1.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, Woodbury. 0.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Woodbury Health Care Center, Woodbury. 1.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Careaparent, Woodbury. 0.6 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55125 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Woodbury Dialysis, Woodbury, 0.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Woodbury, Woodbury, 1.5 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Sun Ray Dialysis Unit, Saint Paul, 3.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 22 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55125.
Hospice Of The Midwest, office in Woodbury, 0.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in Oakdale, 2.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 5.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 9.2 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 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 moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The state recorded a finding in January 2025. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- Your published starting price is a base rate. What would the total monthly cost be for my parent's needs?
- How much have prices gone up in each of the last three years?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- 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 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 New Perspective Woodbury provide?
New Perspective Woodbury is licensed by the state of Minnesota for independent living, assisted living, memory care in Woodbury, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 85 residents.
Does Lilisity rate New Perspective Woodbury?
No. We publish state licensing details for New Perspective Woodbury 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 New Perspective Woodbury 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. The starting prices it publishes are in the Prices section on this page.
How do I contact New Perspective Woodbury?
Use New Perspective Woodbury's website, npseniorliving.com/communities/woodbury, or visit at 2195 Century Avenue South, Woodbury, MN 55125.
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