Assisted Living and Memory Care
Suite Living Senior Care
5600 Credit River Road Se, Prior Lake, MN 55372 · Map
Licensed for 32 residents · SUITE LIVING SENIOR CARE
Suite Living Senior Care is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Prior Lake, Minnesota. It is licensed for 32 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, 32 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422524, current license dated Oct 21, 2025. Licensee SUITE LIVING SENIOR CARE.
Nearest emergency room
6.3 miles
St Francis Regional Medical Center, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Suite Living Senior Care this community | 32 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Ke | 0.7 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Touching Lives Community | 1.1 mi | 7 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Living Hope Homes Peaceful Pin | 2.6 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Norbella Senior Living Prior L | 2.8 mi | 40 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- January 29, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 1
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (January 29, 2026, state report XC2Z11)
MDH: “On April 13, 2026, through April 14, 2026,, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a follow-up survey at the above provider to follow-up on orders issued pursuant to a survey completed on January 29, 2026.”
Survey completed April 14, 2026: 3 correction orders
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the written service plan was followed related to feeding assistance for one of one resident (R8) requiring assistance with eating.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the written service plan was followed related to feeding assistance for one of one resident (R8) requiring assistance with eating. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to (re-issued) Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R1, R2) service plans included all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R1, R2) service plans included all the required content. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(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 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs (re-issued) Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were kept in the original container bearing the original prescription label for one of four residents (R9) who received insulin.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were kept in the original container bearing the original prescription label for one of four residents (R9) who received insulin. [...]”
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 [...]”
Survey completed January 29, 2026: 8 correction orders
- 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 contact information for the state and applicable regional Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and the Office of Ombudsman for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post the required information related to the contact information for the state and applicable regional Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care and the Office of Ombudsman for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities. This had the potential to affect all 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 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 the required content for an emergency relocation for one of two residents (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 for one of two residents (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) completed a resident assessment within 14 days of admission for one of one new resident (R1) and ongoing resident reassessments that did not exceed 90 days for one of two residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a resident assessment within 14 days of admission for one of one new resident (R1) and ongoing resident reassessments that did not exceed 90 days for one of two residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed ensure the written service plan was followed related to repositioning for one of one dependent resident (R1) at risk for skin breakdown.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed ensure the written service plan was followed related to repositioning for one of one dependent resident (R1) at risk for skin breakdown. This resulted in an immediate correction order issued January 28, 2026, at approximately 1:30 p.m. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R1, R2) service plans included all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R1, R2) service plans included all the required content. 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 [...]”
Show all 8
- 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 ensure prescription medications were kept in the original container bearing the original prescription label for one of one resident (R4) during insulin administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure prescription medications were kept in the original container bearing the original prescription label for one of one resident (R4) during insulin administration. [...]”
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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of two
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a treatment or therapy management plan to include all required content for one of two residents (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure healthcare and assisted living services were provided by people who were properly trained and competent to perform their duties including following the service plan for preventing skin breakdown and notifying a registered nurse (RN) of a change in condition related to skin breakdown for one of one dependent resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure healthcare and assisted living services were provided by people who were properly trained and competent to perform their duties including following the service plan for preventing skin breakdown and notifying a registered nurse (RN) of a change in condition related to skin breakdown for one of one dependent resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 1640 (144g.70 Subd. 4 (a-E) - Service Plan, Implementation And Revisions To): $1,000.00
- Tag 2320 (144g.91 Subd. 4 (b) - Appropriate Care And Services): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $2,000.00.
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- November 12, 2024 · report HL391494921M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The AP abused the resident when she administered antipsychotic medications to him without a prescription and caused a chemical restraint. The resident was sedated, disoriented and fell.”
“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 gave the resident unprescribed medications even though hospice staff declined to add Haldol (an antipsychotic) and quetiapine (an antipsychotic) to the resident's medications. The AP, a registered nurse, intentionally placed antipsychotic medications, without a prescription, into the resident's morning medication cup and directed the unlicensed personnel (ULP) to administer them, as well directed the ULP to administer prescribed as needed medications to induce a chemical restraint. Additionally, a few hours later, the AP administered the resident prescribed as needed medications although the resident had been sleepy and drowsy. [...]”
Action taken by facility: “The facility conducted an internal investigation. The AP was no longer employed with the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed October 10, 2024: 4 correction orders
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to report maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) immediately, no later than 24 hours, for one of one residents (R1), reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to report maltreatment to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) immediately, no later than 24 hours, for one of one residents (R1), reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide instruction to unlicensed personnel (ULP) and ensure demonstrated competency on administering as needed (PRN) controlled medications when the same or similar medications are prescribed to be administered on a scheduled basis for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide instruction to unlicensed personnel (ULP) and ensure demonstrated competency on administering as needed (PRN) controlled medications when the same or similar medications are prescribed to be administered on a scheduled basis for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. This deficient practice had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff provided appropriate cares that met accepted medical and nursing care standards for one of one residents (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to ensure staff provided appropriate cares that met accepted medical and nursing care standards for one of one residents (R1). Registered nurse (RN)-G chemically restrained R1 when she set up antipsychotic medications to R1 without a physician's prescription and directed an unlicensed personnel (ULP) to administer. RN-G administered four hours later several sedating medications after R1 was already sleepy and drowsy. [...]”
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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual person was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) / 626.557, Subd. 3 Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- April 19, 2024 · report HL391499867M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility abused the resident when the resident sustained unexplained bruising to her face.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect inconclusive.”
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect inconclusive. While the resident did develop bruising on her forehead, there was insufficient evidence to attribute the bruises to abuse.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility assessed the resident and conducted an internal investigation.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed March 19, 2024: no correction orders issued.
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”
Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”
Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”
Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”
Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”
Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.
What these terms mean
MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”
“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”
For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).
Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.
MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 32 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 SUITE LIVING SENIOR CARE
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422524
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-21
- Licensed capacity
- 32
- Licensee
- SUITE LIVING SENIOR CARE
- County
- Scott County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Audrey McElwain
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 6.3 mi, nursing home 6.2 mi, pharmacy 3.1 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- St Francis Regional Medical Center, Shakopee. 6.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 3 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- St Gertrudes Health & Rehabilitation Center, Shakopee. 6.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Community Home Health Inc, Savage. 3.3 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 3.1 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55372 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Scott County Dialysis, Savage, 2.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fms Dialysis - Shakopee, Shakopee, 6.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Burnsville Dialysis Unit, Burnsville, 7.5 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 27 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55372.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 6.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Gentiva, office in Edina, 10.6 miles away, straight line
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 13.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Burnsville. 7.3 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 relatively 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 November 2024. 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 checked11 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here relatively low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Suite Living Senior Care provide?
Suite Living Senior Care is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Prior Lake, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 32 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Suite Living Senior Care?
No. We publish state licensing details for Suite Living Senior Care but no score, rating, or ranking. Only communities on the Top Communities list or with a Senior Living Alliance Excellence Award, both based on phone-verified resident and family interviews, are ranked.
How much does Suite Living Senior Care cost?
Assisted Living in Minnesota typically starts at $2,200 to $4,800 a month. Based on 74 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Suite Living Senior Care does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Suite Living Senior Care?
Visit Suite Living Senior Care at 5600 Credit River Road Se, Prior Lake, MN 55372.
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