Assisted Living
Noah Home Care
13521 Nicollet Lane, Burnsville, MN 55337 · Map
Licensed for 4 residents · NOAH HOME CARE INC
Noah Home Care is a state-licensed assisted living community in Burnsville, 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 424772, current license dated May 1, 2026. Licensee NOAH HOME CARE INC.
Nearest emergency room
0.6 miles
M Health Fairview Ridges Hospital, rated 4 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Noah Home Care this community | 4 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Sincere Care, Nicollet Lane | 0.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Core Health Care | 0.1 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Universal Healthcare Solutions | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Ilza Assisted Living | 0.3 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- May 28, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 2 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (May 28, 2026, state report 5IFM11)
MDH: “On May 26, 2026, through May 28, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed May 28, 2026: 10 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 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 establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) including documentation of completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) including documentation of completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
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 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 documentation of notification to the registered nurse (RN) when daily weight exceeded parameters for one of one resident (R1) with daily weights.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure documentation of notification to the registered nurse (RN) when daily weight exceeded parameters for one of one resident (R1) with daily weights. [...]”
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 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · 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: “(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 10
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to 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: “(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: 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 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for one of 45 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for one of 45 employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). This had the potential to affect all residents living in the facility. [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored securely during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored securely during medication administration. 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 or one or a [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure delegated procedures were followed for one of two residents (R3) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure delegated procedures were followed for one of two residents (R3) observed during medication administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”
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
- Tag 780 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 810 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (b-F) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- January 17, 2024: report JY6V11 · 13 correction orders
Details
Survey completed April 24, 2024: 5 correction orders
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further actions required”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further actions required”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further actions required”
Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further actions required”
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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further actions required”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
Survey completed January 17, 2024: 8 correction orders
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that are interconnected throughout the facility so actuation of one alarm will cause all alarms in the dwelling to actuate.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that are interconnected throughout the facility so actuation of one alarm will cause all alarms in the dwelling to actuate. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on a record review and interview, the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements. This had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a properly sized egress window for emergency escape for one of two residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide a properly sized egress window for emergency escape for one of two residents (R3). This practice resulted in a level three violation (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) and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) 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 an initial assessment for one of one resident (R1) prior to initiation of services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted an initial assessment for one of one resident (R1) prior to initiation of services. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- 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 the registered nurse (RN) completed a resident assessment within 14 days of admission and every 90 days thereafter for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a resident assessment within 14 days of admission and every 90 days thereafter for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
Show all 8
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure delegated procedures were followed for one of one resident (R1) observed during medication observation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure delegated procedures were followed for one of one resident (R1) observed during medication observation. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse documented resident-specific instructions for an as needed (PRN) medication for one of one resident (R1) 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 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 medications were administered as ordered for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as ordered for one of one resident (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 affected or one or [...]”
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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medication including the medication's prescription number as applicable, for one of one discharged resident
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document in the resident's record the disposition of the medication including the medication's prescription number as applicable, for one of one discharged resident (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 22, 2024 · report HL359884660C
Details
Survey completed February 7, 2024: 2 correction orders
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative; and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) when the resident did not return from the emergency relocation within four days for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative; and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) when the resident did not return from the emergency relocation within four days for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
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 1070: 144G.52 Subd. 10 Right to return Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to allow the return of one of one resident (R1) after they were sent to the emergency room, although the licensee had not issued a notice of termination of services or housing.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to allow the return of one of one resident (R1) after they were sent to the emergency room, although the licensee had not issued a notice of termination of services or housing. Hospital records indicated the licensee would not accept R1 back after being medically cleared to return. The licensee failed to offer any option for R1 to return as a housing-only resident with the necessary services provided by another agency. [...]”
Rule cited: “If a resident is absent from a facility for any reason, including an emergency relocation, the facility shall not refuse to allow a resident to return if a termination of housing has not been effectuated.”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Inconclusive investigations (2)
- January 21, 2025 · report HL359887522M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when they failed to provide meals. As a result, the resident went to the food shelf to obtain food items. Additionally, the facility neglected a resident when they failed to provide transportation, or access to a phone.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive. The facility ordered food items by Instacart (an online food delivery system). Instacart records indicated the facility ordered food items for delivery to the facility prior to the resident going to the food shelf. However, it could not be determined if the food items were sufficient to sustain a weekly menu. The resident suffered no harm. Additionally, law enforcement took the resident's phone which impacted his ability to obtain transportation via Lyft (a ride system). The facility had a land line phone.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility ordered foods weekly from Instacart.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed December 11, 2024: 2 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
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to adhere to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to adhere to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. The licensee failed to separate raw animal foods (meat) from ready-to-eat foods (fruits/vegetables) in the refrigerator. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all three residents of the facility. [...]”
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 485: 144G.41 Subdivision 1.a (a) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to prepare and provide meals to residents, failed to provide a menu at least one week in advance and make available to all residents for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, and interview, the licensee failed to prepare and provide meals to residents, failed to provide a menu at least one week in advance and make available to all residents for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. R1 had to obtain food from the food shelf to make meals. This had the potential to affect all three residents at the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “All assisted living facilities must offer to provide or make available 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 Agriculture (USDA) [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
- December 3, 2022 · report HL359883407M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected resident #1 and resident #2 when resident #2 raped resident #1.”
“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. Resident #1 stated the rape occurred, but the investigation did not find corroborating evidence. Additionally, resident #1 made statements indicating the event may have not occurred.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility contacted law enforcement.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed November 9, 2022: 1 correction order
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and document review the licensee failed to ensure one or more persons were available to respond to the requests of residents for assistance with health or safety needs 24-hours per day, seven days per week when the only staff member in the facility left to run an errand, leaving two residents (R1 and R2) alone in the facility. This had the potential to affect the two residents receiving services from the licensee. [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- August 13, 2024 · report HL359881280M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when facility staff did not provide appropriate wound care for the wounds on both of the resident's legs and right foot, causing the resident to be hospitalized with cellulitis (a bacterial infection of the skin).”
“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 had vascular wounds (skin sores caused by poor blood circulation) on both legs, his left great toe, and was hospitalized due cellulitis. The resident had a history of retaining fluid in his lower extremities which resulted in draining blisters. The facility assessed, monitored, and provided care to the resident's vascular wounds according to physician orders.”
Action taken by facility: “No action taken.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed May 28, 2024: no correction orders issued.
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 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 NOAH HOME CARE INC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 424772
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-05-01
- Licensed capacity
- 4
- Licensee
- NOAH HOME CARE INC
- County
- Dakota County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Barkuni Abu
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 0.6 mi, nursing home 0.5 mi, pharmacy 1.0 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Ridges Hospital, Burnsville. 0.6 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Ebenezer Ridges Geriatric Care Center, Burnsville. 0.5 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Alliance Health Services Inc, Eagan. 3.4 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.0 mile away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55337 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Burnsville Dialysis Unit, Burnsville, 0.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Scott County Dialysis, Savage, 4.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita East Valley Dialysis, Apple Valley, 5.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 23 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55337.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 4.5 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 7.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Caretenders Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 8.2 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Burnsville. 0.6 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively low, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 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?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
What we checked11 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Noah Home Care provide?
Noah Home Care is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Burnsville, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 4 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Noah Home Care?
No. We publish state licensing details for Noah Home Care 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 Noah Home Care 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. Noah Home Care does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Noah Home Care?
Visit Noah Home Care at 13521 Nicollet Lane, Burnsville, MN 55337.
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