Assisted Living and Memory Care

Oak Park Senior Living

13936 Lower 59th Street North, Oak Park Heights, MN 55082 · Map
Licensed for 162 residents · OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING

State license active

Is this your community? Claim this listing

Oak Park Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. It is licensed for 162 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care

162 residentsLicensed capacity

State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care

$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

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.

Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

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.

State inspections

4Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: May 15, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 162 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 425609, current license dated Jun 1, 2026. Licensee OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING.

Nearest emergency room

1.1 miles

Lakeview Memorial 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
Oak Park Senior Living this community		162	Not published	Active	4 substantiated
Boutwells Landing	0.4 mi	120	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Oak Ridge Place	1.0 mi	83	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Peaceful Living	2.7 mi	4	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
New Perspective Lake Elmo	3.3 mi	94	$2,730/mo	Active	No record

State inspection record4 substantiated

Last evaluation: May 15, 2025
Evaluations on record: 2
Investigations substantiated: 4 kept 7 years
Inconclusive: 3 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated: 0 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (May 15, 2025, state report X4CE11)

MDH: “On May 12, 2025, through May 15, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”

Survey completed May 15, 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) 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: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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.
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. The licensee failed to ensure direct care staff appropriately gloved and performed adequate hand hygiene (HH) for one of five employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct an evaluation for activities that addressed all required elements and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation for four of four residents (R2, R3, R4, R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an evaluation for activities that addressed all required elements and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation for four of four residents (R2, R3, R4, R6). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
Tag 2180: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure behavioral symptoms identified were addressed on the service plan for one of one resident (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure behavioral symptoms identified were addressed on the service plan for one of one resident (R3). This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected [...]”
Rule cited: “(e) Behavioral symptoms that negatively impact the resident and others in the assisted living facility with dementia care must be evaluated and included on the service or care plan. [...]”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.

Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included

Earlier evaluations (1)

August 4, 2023: report ENEO11 · 3 correction orders
Details
Survey completed August 4, 2023: 3 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 (21) days
  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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · 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.
  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. The licensee failed to ensure direct care staff appropriately gloved and performed adequate hand hygiene for one of two staff, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D. [...]”
  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 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 prescriber orders for blood glucose monitoring were correctly transcribed, for one of five residents (R3).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescriber orders for blood glucose monitoring were correctly transcribed, for one of five residents (R3). [...]”
  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. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

March 10, 2026 · report HL282279183M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), a facility staff member, neglected the resident when the resident sustained a fall and was found on the floor over 12 hours later.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The AP was 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. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP failed to complete the resident's scheduled evening cares. The resident fell in the evening before the scheduled cares and was found by staff the following morning. The resident was transported to the hospital for an evaluation. During the investigation it was identified that the AP had a pattern of not completing services for residents and documenting that the services were completed.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed an internal investigation, suspended the AP, and completed training with unlicensed staff on completion of services and signing off once the service has been completed. The AP is no longer employed by the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed February 3, 2026: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual person 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.”
April 8, 2025 · report HL282278004M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the staff failed to provide supervision, as a result, the resident remained pinned between the bed frame and side rail for two days and sustained injuries.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility failed to assess the resident's mobility devices, including the bed rail he used because nurses did not complete assessments in the resident's room and did not verify information "carried over" from a previous assessment was still accurate and current. The resident fell, became entrapped in the device, unable to use his call pendant and was stuck for a prolonged amount of time that ceased circulation to his arm and caused rhabdomyolysis (a life-threatening condition from muscle tissue breakdown by being in a position for a prolonged period of time and release of body toxins into the bloodstream). The resident died of complications from entrapment.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility changed their procedures for safety checks and nursing assessments.”
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 March 12, 2025: 3 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements for reporting suspected maltreatment for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed.
  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 one resident (R1) with records reviewed. The licensee was aware R1 was entrapped in his bed rail and died because of the medical complications from the incident, but failed to immediately report the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 4, isolated scope, scope/level letter J · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record reviewed the licensee failed to complete accurate, comprehensive nursing assessments to include assistive devices for one of one resident (R1) with records reviewed. The licensee "carried over" documentation from previous records, and failed to update R1's clinical record to reflect an accurate assessment of his assistive devices, and medical needs. R1's bed contained a bed rail the licensee failed to identify as required by Minnesota (MN) Rules 4659.0150. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- 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.”
November 6, 2023 · report HL282277926M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused a resident when the AP restrained the resident's arms to force medication into the resident's mouth, causing red marks and bruising. It is also alleged the AP was verbally abusive and rough with the resident while providing services.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility provided appropriate training and supervision of the AP. A witness observed the AP hold down the resident's hands, shove medications into the resident's face, and verbally taunt the resident.”
Action taken by facility: “The AP no longer works for the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment. The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. [...]”
Survey completed October 25, 2023: 2 correction orders
- Tag 1690: 144G.71 Subdivision 1 Medication management services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) Days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure there was a medication management system in place to prevent diversion of narcotics for two of two
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and document review, the licensee failed to ensure there was a medication management system in place to prevent diversion of narcotics for two of two residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for missing medications when 28 Oxycodone (a narcotic pain medication) tablets were found to have been replaced with other medications. This had the potential to affect all 88 residents receiving services. It could not be determined if harm occurred. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) This section applies only to assisted living facilities that provide medication management services. [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure two of two resident(s) reviewed (R1 and R2) were free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure two of two resident(s) reviewed (R1 and R2) were free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual 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.”
November 21, 2022 · report HL282272547M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility abused a resident when staff held him down to administer medications. In addition, the facility neglected a resident when staff failed to ensure hourly checks were done which resulted in a resident lying on the floor for an extended period.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into 2 allegations and found: abuse not substantiated; neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated. There was no evidence to support staff held the resident down to administer medications. The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. Video footage captured the resident's fall and showed him lying on the floor for approximately four hours. The resident's service plan indicated staff were supposed to provide hourly safety checks. An equal opportunity employer.”
Action taken by facility: “Facility provided education to staff.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed October 6, 2022: 3 correction orders
- 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 was developed to include the required content for one (R1) of three records reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan was developed to include the required content for one (R1) of three records reviewed. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an agency staff accurately documented and provided scheduled services for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an agency staff accurately documented and provided scheduled services for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed. Agency staff falsely documented they performed safety checks on R1 during the time R1 was lying on the floor in his room. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one resident (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observations, interviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure one resident (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment. R1 was neglected. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination that neglect occurred, and that the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. The MDH concluded there was a preponderance of evidence that maltreatment occurred.”
  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.”

Inconclusive investigations (3)

March 10, 2026 · report HL282279402M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), a facility staff member, neglected the resident when the AP left the resident on the toilet for approximately one and one-half hour. The resident sustained a fall while self-transferring off the toilet.”
“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 AP assisted the resident into the bathroom to use the toilet. The AP received a call from another resident and went to assist. When the AP returned to the resident's apartment, the resident was found on the floor in the kitchen area of the apartment. Due to conflicting documentation and interviews, it could not be determined that the resident's fall would have been prevented had the AP stayed with the resident while she used the toilet.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility notified hospice, and family of the fall. The facility completed an internal investigation and provided education to the facility staff regarding documentation of completed services and providing details in an incident report. The AP is no longer employed at the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed February 3, 2026: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of two residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual person 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.”
February 23, 2026 · report HL282276122M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
“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 AP found the resident deceased but did not clearly communicate if she witnessed the resident fall or if she found the resident on the floor. It was true CPR was initiated by first responders, however when paramedics arrived the advanced directive was clarified and CPR discontinued.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reviewed the procedures for resident falls, deaths, and hospice with all caregivers, which was completed on each unit and with one-to-ones. The facility added communication to identify which residents were on hospice. The AP was no longer employed at the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed November 20, 2025: no correction orders issued.
February 18, 2026 · report HL282275622M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined whether abuse occurred was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: whether abuse occurred inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined whether abuse occurred was inconclusive. The resident did have visible marks on her skin which likely occurred when the AP and the resident hands grappled over the AP's name tag and the call pendant. However, the investigation did not identify evidence to show this incident met the definition of abuse or a potential error in therapeutic conduct on behalf of the AP. The accounts of the two people present, while generally the same, included inconsistencies which led to a determination of inconclusive.”
Action taken by facility: “The AP was removed from the schedule during an internal investigation. The AP no longer works at the facility. A review of vulnerable adult training and expectations was reviewed with all staff after the incident.”
Action taken by MDH: “No action at this time.”
Survey completed November 20, 2025: 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”

Level 4: “a violation harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury or death, or a violation that was likely to lead to serious injury or death”

Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”

Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”

Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”

Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.

What these terms mean

MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”

“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”

For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).

Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.

MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 162 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 OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING

License type: Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number: 425609
License status: Active
Current license dated: 2026-06-01
Licensed capacity: 162
Licensee: OAK PARK SENIOR LIVING
County: Washington County
Administrator/Authorized Agent: Bjorn Horgen

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 1.1 mi, nursing home 0.3 mi, pharmacy 0.8 mi

Nearest hospital with an emergency room: Lakeview Memorial Hospital, Stillwater. 1.1 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
Nearest Medicare nursing home: The Gables of Boutwells Landing, Oak Park Heights. 0.3 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office: Lakeview Homecare, Oak Park Heights. 1.0 mile away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy: Cub Pharmacy. 0.8 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area: USDA classes ZIP code 55082 as metropolitan (metropolitan high commuting).
Dialysis within 15 miles: Davita River City Dialysis, Stillwater, 0.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Hudson Dialysis, Hudson, 7.4 miles away, straight line (has a shift starting after 5 pm; CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Maplewood Dialysis Center, Maplewood, 9.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Hospice: 22 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55082.
Lakeview Hospice, office in Oak Park Heights, 1.0 mile away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 8.0 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in Oakdale, 8.5 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice: Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 17.4 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 relatively 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 state recorded a finding in March 2026. What was it, and how was it fixed?
The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
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?
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 relatively 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 Oak Park Senior Living provide?

Oak Park Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Oak Park Heights, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 162 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Oak Park Senior Living?

No. We publish state licensing details for Oak Park Senior Living 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 Oak Park Senior Living 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. Oak Park Senior Living does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Oak Park Senior Living?

Visit Oak Park Senior Living at 13936 Lower 59th Street North, Oak Park Heights, MN 55082.

Choosing assisted livingOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

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

Other communities in Washington County

Amen Home Care ProviderOakdale, MN · Assisted Living American SpiritAfton, MN · Assisted Living Amerigrace Care ServicesCottage Grove, MN · Assisted Living Amira Choice Forest LakeForest Lake, MN · Assisted Living · Memory Care Anchor Care ServicesCottage Grove, MN · Assisted Living Applewood Pointe Coop of WoodburyWoodbury, MN · Independent living Artis Senior Living of WoodburyWoodbury, MN · Assisted Living · Memory Care Beyond Senior LivingWoodbury, MN · Assisted Living