Assisted Living and Memory Care
Ridgeview Senior Living
1009 10th Avenue Ne, Sauk Rapids, MN 56374 · Map
Licensed for 57 residents · RIDGEVIEW SENIOR LIVING
Ridgeview Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Sauk Rapids, Minnesota. It is licensed for 57 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Ridgeview Senior Living says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Has a separate memory care unit, wing or neighborhood.
Life within our memory care neighborhoods is structured to provide comfort, reduce anxiety, and promote a sense of purpose.
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Pets allowed.
Bring your furry friend along for the ride in our pet-friendly community.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026)
Lilisity’s independent report
What the public record shows
Gathered by Lilisity from state and federal sources. Communities can’t edit this part of the page.
License
Active, 57 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422162, current license dated Oct 1, 2025. Licensee RIDGEVIEW SENIOR LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
1.4 miles
Centracare - St. Cloud 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ridgeview Senior Living this community | 57 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated | |
| Legacy Place | 0.4 mi | 8 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Ol-Us St Cloud | 1.0 mi | 70 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Harmony View Assisted Living | 1.2 mi | 30 | Not published | Active | 4 substantiated |
| Skylight Gardens Apartments Ll | 1.6 mi | 63 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record3 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- April 23, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 3 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (April 23, 2025, state report 6TLH11)
MDH: “On April 21, 2025, through April 23, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed April 23, 2025: 8 correction orders
- Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which included a facility TB risk assessment, a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test, for one of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D), a completed health history and symptom screening for two of three employees (LPN-D and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E), and initial TB training for one of three employees (LPN)-D.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which included a facility TB risk assessment, a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test, for one of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D), a completed health history and symptom screening for two of three [...]”
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 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of Minnesota State Fire Code Rules, Chapter 7511.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of Minnesota State Fire Code Rules, Chapter 7511. 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 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide required training and drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide required training and drills. This had 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 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30 days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30 days of providing services for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations included all required content for two of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations included all required content for two of three employees (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 8
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received eight hours of initial dementia care training within the first 80 hours worked for one of one employee (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received eight hours of initial dementia care training within the first 80 hours worked for one of one employee (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to keep a medication in
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to keep a medication in its original container bearing the original prescription label. 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a safety risk assessment or hazard vulnerability assessment of the physical environment on and around the property with mitigation factors.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide a safety risk assessment or hazard vulnerability assessment of the physical environment on and around the property with mitigation factors. This deficient practice had the ability to affect more than a limited number of residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- February 17, 2023: report QIIY11 · 20 correction orders
Details
Survey completed February 17, 2023: 20 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This 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 485: 144G.41 Subd 1. (13) (i) (A) and (C) Minimum Requirements Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the Assisted Living contract did not require any resident to include and pay for meals as a part of their assisted living package fee for one of one resident (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the Assisted Living contract did not require any resident to include and pay for meals as a part of their assisted living package fee for one of one resident (R4). This had the potential to affect all residents of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (i) at least three nutritious meals daily with snacks available seven days per week, according to the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of [...]”
- Tag 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the employee records contained the required content for three of three employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and ULP-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee records contained the required content for three of three employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and 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. [...]”
- 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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 evidence of a two-stop tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as blood test for one of three employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-A). [...]”
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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with all of the required content. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 20
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure documentation of all provided services was completed for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure documentation of all provided services was completed for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4). In addition, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary with the required content for one of one discharged resident (R5). [...]”
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 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 the required elements, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, and failed to conduct required evacuation drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on a record review and interview, the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with the required elements, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, and failed to conduct required evacuation drills. 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 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing for two of four residents (R3, R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing for two of four residents (R3, R4). [...]”
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 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure background studies were conducted prior to staff providing services, for one of four employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure background studies were conducted prior to staff providing services, for one of four employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”
- Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to assisted living licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for three of three employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and ULP-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to assisted living licensing requirements and regulations prior to providing services for three of three employees (clinical nurse supervisor (CNS)-A, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and ULP-F). [...]”
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 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 14-day reassessment and monitoring using the uniform assessment tool for one of four residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a 14-day reassessment and monitoring using the uniform assessment tool for one of four residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a service plan included the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a service plan included the required content for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4). 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 [...]”
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 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 transcribed and administered as prescribed for one of three residents (R7) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were transcribed and administered as prescribed for one of three residents (R7) 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 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed comprehensive written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed comprehensive written procedures for the unlicensed personnel (ULP) providing medications for residents having unplanned time away when the licensed nurse was not available. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”
- Tag 1830: 144G.71 Subd. 14 Renewal of prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for one of four residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to renew prescriptions at least every 12 months for one of four residents (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 or one or a limited [...]”
Rule cited: “Prescriptions must be renewed at least every 12 months or more frequently as indicated by the assessment in subdivision 2. Prescriptions for controlled substances must comply with chapter 152.”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 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 provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4) who resided in the assisted living with dementia care facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an evaluation for activities that addressed all provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation for four of four residents (R1, R2, R3, and R4) who resided in the assisted living with dementia care facility. [...]”
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure behavioral symptoms identified were addressed on the service plan for one of one resident (R1) with behaviors. [...]”
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. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · 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 two of two residents (R1, R4) with an assistive device, and one of one resident (R6) with a hospital bed with bedrails.
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 two of two residents (R1, R4) with an assistive device, and one of one resident (R6) with a hospital bed with bedrails. [...]”
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.”
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,000.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- March 31, 2026 · report HL206199322M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when she grabbed the resident on his buttocks and made inappropriate comments that made the resident feel uncomfortable.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”
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 sexual abuse. The resident stated the AP straddled his legs and hovered over him in his recliner while making comments about wanting to sleep with the resident which made him feel uncomfortable. Then the AP reached into the recliner, grabbed the resident's buttocks in a sexual manner and squeezed while stating, "there, that ought to make you smile". The resident's wife witnessed the incident and her statement aligned with the resident's. The AP denied the allegation.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reported the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) and law enforcement, investigated the incident, provided resources to the resident following the incident, and re-educated staff on abuse and inappropriate conduct. 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 January 30, 2026: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one residents (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment, R1 was abused.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews and document review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one residents (R1) reviewed was free from maltreatment, R1 was abused. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, a 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.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- February 24, 2025 · report HL206196328M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when supervision was not provided in accordance with the resident's service plan. The resident was left unattended in the bathroom when she fell, requiring her to be evaluated in the emergency room.”
“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 reassess the resident after she began requiring additional assistance with transfers and required the use of a wheelchair for mobility. Facility staff noted a brake on the wheelchair was not locking properly but continued to use the wheelchair. The resident tried to self-transfer out of the wheelchair and fell on the floor.”
Action taken by facility: “No action taken.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed February 3, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- July 2, 2024 · report HL206192480M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The resident was abused when the alleged perpetrator (AP) was observed on video surveillance following the resident in close proximity causing agitation. The AP grabbed the resident and pulled the resident to the couch and then the ground, and physically restrained the resident using the weight of her body and a bear hug for several minutes while the resident fought to get away.”
“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 AP was observed on video pursuing the resident in close proximity causing agitation as the resident repeatedly tried to get away from the AP. Then, the AP grabbed the resident and forced the resident onto the couch where the AP physically restrained the resident for several minutes using her arms, legs, and weight of her body causing the resident distress. The AP continued to restrain the resident until separated by another staff. The AP admitted to restraining the resident.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility suspended the AP, reported the incident to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC), investigated the incident, and provided all staff retraining on dementia care following the incident. 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 June 10, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one of one residents reviewed, (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure one of one of one residents reviewed, (R1) was 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. No plan of correction is required for this tag.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- January 18, 2024 · report HL206198684M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the resident experienced a change in condition and was left in the dining room all day. The facility did not notify a registered nurse or emergency services.”
“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. It was unable to be determined if neglect occurred. Facility staff interviewed could not recall details of the incident and documentation available provided no evidence of an observed change in the resident's condition. When the resident's family reported a concern with a change in the resident's behavior, facility staff contacted emergency medical services (EMS) per the family's request and the resident was transported to the hospital for further evaluation. An equal opportunity employer.”
Action taken by facility: “No action taken.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed December 1, 2023: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- January 30, 2024 · report HL206198555C
Details
Survey completed December 1, 2023: 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 57 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 RIDGEVIEW SENIOR LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422162
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-01
- Licensed capacity
- 57
- Licensee
- RIDGEVIEW SENIOR LIVING
- County
- Benton County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Carolyn Hervin
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 1.4 mi, nursing home 2.1 mi, pharmacy 1.3 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Centracare - St. Cloud Hospital, Saint Cloud. 1.4 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Good Shepherd Lutheran Home, Sauk Rapids. 2.1 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Good Shepherd Home Health Care, Sauk Rapids. 2.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.3 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56374 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fresenius Kidney Care St. Cloud, Saint Cloud, 2.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
- Hospice
- 6 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56374.
Centracare Hospice, office in Waite Park, 4.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in St. Cloud, 4.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Saint Cloud, 8.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Allina Health System, Annandale. 22.4 miles away, straight line. 2 geriatric medicine doctors 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 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 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?
What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here 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 |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Ridgeview Senior Living provide?
Ridgeview Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Sauk Rapids, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 57 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Ridgeview Senior Living?
No. We publish state licensing details for Ridgeview 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 Ridgeview 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. Ridgeview Senior Living does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Ridgeview Senior Living?
Use Ridgeview Senior Living's website, accura.healthcare/sauk-rapids, or visit at 1009 10th Avenue Ne, Sauk Rapids, MN 56374.
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