Assisted Living and Memory Care
Shepherd Senior Housing
1306 Alton Street, St. Paul, MN 55116 · Map
Licensed for 64 residents · SHEPHERD SENIOR HOUSING LLC
Shepherd Senior Housing is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in St. Paul, Minnesota. It is licensed for 64 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, 64 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 424983, current license dated Mar 7, 2026. Licensee SHEPHERD SENIOR HOUSING LLC.
Nearest emergency room
4.0 miles
Allina United Hospital, rated 3 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shepherd Senior Housing this community | 64 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated | |
| Carefirst Assisted Living | 0.7 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Highland Gw | 0.8 mi | 36 | Not published | Active | 8 substantiated |
| Highland Path | 0.9 mi | 90 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Lexington Landing | 1.2 mi | 64 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- March 31, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (March 31, 2026, state report Z07311)
MDH: “On July 27, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a follow-up survey for the above provider to follow-up on orders issued pursuant to a survey completed on April 1, 2026.”
Survey completed July 28, 2026: 8 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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 8
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
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 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
Survey completed March 31, 2026: 8 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 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 develop a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content for staff, residents, and visitors to view.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content for staff, residents, and visitors to view. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure resident records included a discharge summary for one of two discharged residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure resident records included a discharge summary for one of two discharged residents (R2). 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 8
- 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 the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative, and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation greater than four days for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative, and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation greater than four days for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 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 a comprehensive assessment within 14 days after admission for one of three residents (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted a comprehensive assessment within 14 days after admission for one of three residents (R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document the quantity of medications discharged with one of four discharged residents (R1) who received medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document the quantity of medications discharged with one of four discharged residents (R1) who received medication management services. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 7, 2024: report 7R5O11 · 31 correction orders
Details
Survey completed June 4, 2024: 14 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 650: 144G.42 Subd. 8 Employee records (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 (re-issued) 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).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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). [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 14
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 (re-issued) scope/level letter E
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
- Tag 2350: 144G.91 Subd. 7 Courteous treatment (re-issued) scope/level letter D
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “No further action required.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be treated with courtesy and respect, and to have the resident's property treated with respect”
Survey completed March 7, 2024: 17 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. The licensee failed to ensure direct care staff appropriately gloved and performed adequate hand hygiene for one of four staff (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 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 the required information related to the grievance procedure and contact information for the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities, as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the grievance procedure and contact information for the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities, as well as information for reporting suspected maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC). This had the potential to affect all 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 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 contained the required content for one of two employees, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employee records contained the required content for one of two employees, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D. [...]”
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, 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).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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). The licensee failed to ensure screening for active TB (either by a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or a single Interferon-Gamma Release Assay (IGRA) blood test was completed and documented for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H). [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 17
- 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 post a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all visitors, employees, and residents. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included accurate documentation that services had been provided as identified in the service plan for one of four residents (R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included accurate documentation that services had been provided as identified in the service plan for one of four residents (R8). [...]”
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 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the employee had a cleared Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) NETStudy 2.0 background study for one of two employees;
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the employee had a cleared Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) NETStudy 2.0 background study for one of two employees; unlicensed personnel (ULP-D). This had the potential to affect all residents in the facility. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on March 4, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. [...]”
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 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 a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing a delegated task within 30 days of providing services for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, 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 two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services, for one of two staff, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff providing services completed an orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services, for one of two staff, unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D. [...]”
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, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed ongoing comprehensive reassessments using the uniform assessment tool at an interval not to exceed 90 days for three of four residents (R1,R7, R10). [...]”
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: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a current written service plan was revised, and included a signature or other authentication by the facility and by the resident, or their representative, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of four residents (R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a current written service plan was revised, and included a signature or other authentication by the facility and by the resident, or their representative, documenting agreement on the services to be provided for one of four residents (R8). [...]”
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 the steps of the medication administration process were followed for one of four residents (R10).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the steps of the medication administration process were followed for one of four residents (R10). [...]”
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 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 discard expired medication for one of four residents (R13).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, and interview, the licensee failed to discard expired medication for one of four residents (R13). 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 an 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). [...]”
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 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 ensure an individualized activity plan contained all required content for four of four residents (R1, R7, R8, R10).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individualized activity plan contained all required content for four of four residents (R1, R7, R8, R10). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, pattern scope, scope/level letter H · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for one
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for one of one resident (R5) who utilized consumer bed rails, and one of two residents (R4) who utilized hospital style bed rails. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on March 4, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. [...]”
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.”
- Tag 2350: 144G.91 Subd. 7 Courteous treatment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident (R10) reviewed, was treated with dignity and respect.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure one of one resident (R10) reviewed, was treated with dignity and respect. 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be treated with courtesy and respect, and to have the resident's property treated with respect”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,000.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements (re-issued) scope/level letter F
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- October 14, 2024 · report HL258293641M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when they failed to provide adequate monitoring and supervision according to the resident's assessed needs and service plan. As a result, the resident fell two times one night while unsupervised. In addition, the facility failed to maintain the resident's apartment at normal temperatures and as a result required hospitalization.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into 2 allegations and found: neglect substantiated; neglect not substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. Facility staff failed to provide the resident with his care planned every two-hour safety check and toileting assistance. The resident fell twice in one night and was on the floor for an unknown amount of time. The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. It could not be determined if the resident's apartment heating issues contributed to the resident's hospitalization.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility repaired the resident's apartment heat after the resident was sent to the hospital.”
Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed August 29, 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 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
- November 9, 2023 · report HL258293242C
Details
Survey completed November 9, 2023: 3 correction orders
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one or one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one or one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1070: 144G.52 Subd. 10 Right to return Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to allow the return of one of one residents (R1) after they were sent to the emergency room, although the licensee had not issued a notice of termination of services or housing.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to allow the return of one of one residents (R1) after they were sent to the emergency room, although the licensee had not issued a notice of termination of services or housing. The licensee failed to offer any option for R1 to return as a housing-only resident with the necessary services provided by another agency. [...]”
Rule cited: “If a resident is absent from a facility for any reason, including an emergency relocation, the facility shall not refuse to allow a resident to return if a termination of housing has not been effectuated.”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring 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) completed assessments as required for one of one residents (R1) with a change in condition.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed assessments as required for one of one residents (R1) with a change in condition. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- August 11, 2023 · report HL258294903M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) physically abused the resident by placing their hands on the resident's face in a way to force the resident to take medication.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was inconclusive. The investigation found there was insufficient evidence to determine if abuse occurred. The AP denied the allegations, and the resident could not be interviewed due to her cognitive impairment. Video footage of the day of the allegation was not available for the investigation and per facility review, there was obstructed view of the resident and AP's faces.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed an internal investigation and the AP no longer works for the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed July 18, 2023: 2 correction orders
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to follow infection control practices for 1 of 1 residents (R1) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to follow infection control practices for 1 of 1 residents (R1) reviewed. Unlicensed personnel (ULP)-B gave R1 a pill off the floor. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: 7 days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure proper training and competency for 1 of 2 employees ((unlicensed personnel) ULP-B) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to ensure proper training and competency for 1 of 2 employees ((unlicensed personnel) ULP-B) reviewed. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death) and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected [...]”
Rule cited: “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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- October 15, 2025 · report HL258295642C
Details
Survey completed October 15, 2025: no correction orders issued.
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”
Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”
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 64 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 SHEPHERD SENIOR HOUSING LLC
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 424983
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-03-07
- Licensed capacity
- 64
- Licensee
- SHEPHERD SENIOR HOUSING LLC
- County
- Ramsey County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Lisa Hoff
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 4.0 mi, nursing home 0.2 mi, pharmacy 1.6 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Allina United Hospital, Saint Paul. 4.0 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Highland Chateau Health And Rehabilitation Center, Saint Paul. 0.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Sholom Home Care, Saint Paul. 1.8 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.6 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55116 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Highland Park Dialysis, Saint Paul, 1.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita West St Paul Dialysis Unit, West St Paul, 4.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc - West St Paul Dialysis, West St Paul, 4.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 24 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55116.
Sholom Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 1.8 miles away, straight line
Our Lady Of Peace Hospice, office in Saint Paul, 3.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 4.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 3.6 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The state recorded a finding in October 2024. What was it, and how was it fixed?
- The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
What we checked11 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here 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 Shepherd Senior Housing provide?
Shepherd Senior Housing is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in St. Paul, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 64 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Shepherd Senior Housing?
No. We publish state licensing details for Shepherd Senior Housing 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 Shepherd Senior Housing 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. Shepherd Senior Housing does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Shepherd Senior Housing?
Visit Shepherd Senior Housing at 1306 Alton Street, St. Paul, MN 55116.
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