Assisted Living and Memory Care
Prairie Cottages of Owatonna
150 24th Street Ne, Owatonna, MN 55060 · Map
Licensed for 52 residents · PRAIRIE COTTAGES OF OWATONNA
Prairie Cottages of Owatonna is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Owatonna, Minnesota. It is licensed for 52 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, 52 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422176, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee PRAIRIE COTTAGES OF OWATONNA.
Nearest emergency room
3.3 miles
Owatonna Hospital, rated 5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prairie Cottages of Owatonna this community | 52 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Cedar Lodge | 0.2 mi | 60 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| The Brooks on St Paul | 0.4 mi | 57 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Northstar of Owatonna | 0.6 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Valley Terrace of Owatonna | 1.1 mi | 86 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- November 14, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (November 14, 2024, state report VUGU11)
MDH: “On February 3, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a follow-up survey at the above provider to follow-up on orders issued pursuant to a survey completed on November 14, 2024.”
Survey completed February 3, 2025: 6 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
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 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and execute an assisted living written contract with the required content for one of three residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and execute an assisted living written contract with the required content for one of three residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility may not offer or provide housing or assisted living services to any individual unless it has executed a written contract with the resident. [...]”
- Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of five employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-J) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of five employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-J) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame. [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included all required content for one of three residents (R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included all required content for one of three residents (R5). 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: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration (re-issued) Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for three of five residents (R1, R2, and R3) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for three of five residents (R1, R2, and R3) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP). [...]”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for four of four residents (R1, R2, R5, and R6) who received services under the assisted living with dementia care license and resided in the secure memory care unit.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for four of four residents (R1, R2, R5, and R6) who received services under the assisted living with dementia care license and resided in the secure memory care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
Survey completed November 14, 2024: 20 correction orders
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure sufficient staffing to meet the needs of one of three residents (R3), who required an as needed (PRN) medication.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure sufficient staffing to meet the needs of one of three residents (R3), who required an as needed (PRN) medication. [...]”
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 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) 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 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 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place, information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place, information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content. This had the potential to affect the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and email contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include the required content for one of three residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employee records included all required content for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records included all required content for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must maintain current records of each paid employee, each regularly scheduled volunteer providing services, and each individual contractor providing services. [...]”
Show all 20
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”
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 900: 144G.50 Subdivision 1 Contract required Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and execute an assisted living written contract with the required content for one of three residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and execute an assisted living written contract with the required content for one of three residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility may not offer or provide housing or assisted living services to any individual unless it has executed a written contract with the resident. [...]”
- Tag 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”
- Tag 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (a) Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) to include all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) to include all required content. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Training and competency evaluations for all unlicensed personnel must include the following: (1) documentation requirements for all services provided; (2) reports of changes in the resident's condition to the supervisor designated by the facility; (3) [...]”
- Tag 1380: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (b) Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) to include all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) to include all required content. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) In addition to paragraph (a), training and competency evaluation for unlicensed personnel providing assisted living services must include: (1) observing, reporting, and documenting resident status; (2) basic knowledge of body functioning and changes in [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for two of three unlicensed personnel
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for two of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-H and ULP-I). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1460: 144G.63 Subdivision 1 Orientation of staff and supervisors Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I) completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services to residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I) completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services to residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “All staff providing and supervising direct services must complete an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing assisted living services to residents. [...]”
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure annual training included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure three of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-H and ULP-I) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure three of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F, ULP-H and ULP-I) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame. [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- 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) conducted timely ongoing nursing assessments for two of three residents (R2 and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted timely ongoing nursing assessments for two of three residents (R2 and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was signed and revised to reflect the current services provided for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
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 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included all required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included all required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, and 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 a pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are affected, [...]”
Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP). [...]”
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 1770: 144G.71 Subd. 9 Documentation of medication setup Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure documentation of medication set up included all the required content for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure documentation of medication set up included all the required content for one of one resident (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “Documentation of dates of medication setup, name of medication, quantity of dose, times to be administered, route of administration, and name of person completing medication setup must be done at the time of setup.”
- 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 individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for two of two residents (R1 and R2) who received services under the assisted living with dementia care license and resided in the secure memory care unit.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for two of two residents (R1 and R2) who received services under the assisted living with dementia care license and resided in the secure memory care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- December 9, 2022: report 3YYZ11 · 18 correction orders
Details
Survey completed November 9, 2022: 18 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: (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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to review its emergency preparedness plan, or practice and document testing of its plan at least twice annually as required.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to review its emergency preparedness plan, or practice and document testing of its plan at least twice annually as required. In addition, the facility failed to evaluate/revise its missing person policy at least quarterly or post its emergency plan or exit diagrams in the building. This had the potential to affect all 38 residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”
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 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 provide the required posted fire evacuation plans for residents and staff.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide the required posted fire evacuation plans for residents and staff. This has the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for three of three residents (R1, R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for three of three residents (R1, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- 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 for an emergency relocation to
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation to one of two residents (R2). In addition, the licensee failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of R2's relocation within four days as required. [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 18
- Tag 1070: 144G.52 Subd. 10 Right to return 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 termination of housing and did not allow a resident to return to the facility after an emergency relocation when one of one resident (R2) posed an imminent safety risk to herself, other residents, and facility staff members and required hospitalization.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written termination of housing and did not allow a resident to return to the facility after an emergency relocation when one of one resident (R2) posed an imminent safety risk to herself, other residents, and facility staff members and required hospitalization. [...]”
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 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs 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) directly supervised unlicensed personnel (ULP) performing delegated tasks within 30 days of the staff performing such tasks for one of two employees (ULP-H).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) directly supervised unlicensed personnel (ULP) performing delegated tasks within 30 days of the staff performing such tasks for one of two employees (ULP-H). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-H) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-H) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure annual training was completed and included all required topics for two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-H).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure annual training was completed and included all required topics for two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F and ULP-H). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received the required amount of dementia care training in the
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame for two of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-B and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a change of condition assessment for one of four residents (R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a change of condition assessment for one of four residents (R8). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of four resident (R8) service plans was revised to reflect the current services provided.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of four resident (R8) service plans was revised to reflect the current services provided. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure mediations were administered as prescribed for one of three residents (R3) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure mediations were administered as prescribed for one of three residents (R3) observed during medication administration. [...]”
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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident receiving prescribed treatments, and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) specified, in writing, specific instructions for each resident receiving prescribed treatments, and documented those instructions in the resident's record for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter. [...]”
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 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure treatment services were documented in the record for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure treatment services were documented in the record for one of one resident (R8) who had an indwelling urinary catheter. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure required policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care were provided to residents/legal and designated representatives at the time of move-in for three of three residents (R1, R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure required policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care were provided to residents/legal and designated representatives at the time of move-in for three of three residents (R1, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R1) with an assistive device (consumer bed rail).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for one of one resident (R1) with an assistive device (consumer bed rail). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
- 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
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- July 31, 2025 · report HL305802822M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “Facility staff (unlicensed personnel) neglected the resident when staff failed to report a fall and the resident was found deceased two hours later.”
“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. Although a fall went unreported and the resident was later found deceased, there was not a preponderance of evidence to determine that the fall contributed to the resident's death.”
Action taken by facility: “Unlicensed Caregivers #1 and #2 were terminated for failing to follow fall protocol.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed June 10, 2025: 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 52 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 PRAIRIE COTTAGES OF OWATONNA
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422176
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 52
- Licensee
- PRAIRIE COTTAGES OF OWATONNA
- County
- Steele County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Becky Holmgren
Source: Minnesota state licensing records (agency listing), retrieved 2026-09-09. Licensing status is a matter of public record; it is not a quality rating.
Administrator/Authorized Agent name from the Minnesota licensing record, as of Sep 9, 2026.
Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs
How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota
- Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)
Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 3.3 mi, nursing home 3.4 mi, pharmacy 13.2 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Owatonna Hospital, Owatonna. 3.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars. Location approximate.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Benedictine Living Community Owatonna, Owatonna. 3.4 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Steele County Phns, Owatonna. 1.3 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 13.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55060 as micropolitan (micropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Mayo Dialysis - Owatonna, Owatonna, 3.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Davita Faribault Dialysis Unit, Faribault, 12.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 12 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55060.
- Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Southern Cities Clinic, Faribault. 13.1 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire very low, tornado very high, heat wave relatively low, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers 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?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
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 Prairie Cottages of Owatonna provide?
Prairie Cottages of Owatonna is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Owatonna, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 52 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Prairie Cottages of Owatonna?
No. We publish state licensing details for Prairie Cottages of Owatonna 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 Prairie Cottages of Owatonna 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. Prairie Cottages of Owatonna does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Prairie Cottages of Owatonna?
Visit Prairie Cottages of Owatonna at 150 24th Street Ne, Owatonna, MN 55060.
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