Assisted Living and Memory Care
Summit Hill Senior Living
1824 Old Hudson Road, St. Paul, MN 55119 · Map
Licensed for 115 residents · SUMMIT HILL SENIOR LIVING
Summit Hill Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in St. Paul, Minnesota. It is licensed for 115 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 Summit Hill 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.
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, 115 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 421932, current license dated Aug 1, 2025. Licensee SUMMIT HILL SENIOR LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
3.1 miles
M Health Fairview Woodwinds 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summit Hill Senior Living this community | 115 | Not published | Active | 3 substantiated | |
| Crystal Edge 2 | 0.3 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Restful Living | 0.4 mi | 44 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Unity Home Care | 0.5 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| United Assisted Living | 0.7 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record3 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- April 10, 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 10, 2025, state report 5NRJ11)
MDH: “On April 7, 2025, through April 10, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed April 10, 2025: 5 correction orders
- Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety by failing to post the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to support protection and safety by failing to post the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors of the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “The facility shall support protection and safety through access to the state's systems for reporting suspected criminal activity and suspected vulnerable adult maltreatment by: (1) posting the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided [...]”
- 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 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 [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the current State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the current State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required training.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with the required content and provide the required training. 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 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 prescribe mitigations for the hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to prescribe mitigations for the hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, 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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- December 2, 2022: report 2ZMU11 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed December 2, 2022: 10 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines.
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, and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines. This had the potential to affect all residents of the assisted living with dementia care 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 485: 144G.41 Subd 1. (13) (i) (A) and (C) Minimum Requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota
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, and the recommended dietary allowances in the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines, including seasonal fresh fruits and vegetables. The licensee further failed to inform residents, in advance, of menu changes. This had the potential to affect all 100 residents of the assisted living with dementia care 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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide minimum emergency generator system inspections as part of the emergency plan required under Minnesota Rules, Part 4659.0100 to ensure the proper performance of the generator.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on the interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide minimum emergency generator system inspections as part of the emergency plan required under Minnesota Rules, Part 4659.0100 to ensure the proper performance of the generator. 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 [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a working smoke alarm in resident apartment unit 704 and the interconnection requirement of the smoke alarms inside the one-bedroom living units located throughout the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide a working smoke alarm in resident apartment unit 704 and the interconnection requirement of the smoke alarms inside the one-bedroom living units located throughout the facility. This has the potential to directly affect residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) 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 maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment of the facility in a continuous state of good repair and operation. This has the potential to directly affect the health, safety, and well-being of all residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
Show all 10
- Tag 970: 144.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living contract did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents living at the facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- 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 ongoing resident monitoring and reassessment, not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last date of the assessment for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing resident monitoring and reassessment, not to exceed 90 calendar days from the last date of the assessment for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- 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 develop a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment plan to identify hazard vulnerabilities and mitigations on and around the property to protect memory care residents from harm. This has the potential to directly affect staff, visitors, and all memory care residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”
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 2090: 144G.82 Subdivision 1 General Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain a dignified dining experience by using appropriate tableware in the dining room.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, and interview, the licensee failed to maintain a dignified dining experience by using appropriate tableware in the dining room. This had the potential to affect all of the licensee's residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The licensee of an assisted living facility with dementia care is responsible for the care and housing of the persons with dementia and the provision of person-centered care that promotes each resident's dignity, independence, and comfort. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care standards, medical or nursing standards for one of one resident (R11).
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 (R11). This had the potential to cause harm to R11. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- September 30, 2024 · report HL286053602M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected the resident when the AP failed to provide safety checks and cares to the resident. Staff found the resident deceased in the morning.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP did not complete safety checks or other cares for the resident on the overnight shift. Incoming day staff found the resident deceased in her room the following morning; approximately 10 hours since the resident was last seen by staff.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed an internal investigation and provided re-training for staff regarding the difference between the eMAR and service tasks.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed August 7, 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 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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- September 18, 2023 · report HL286057225M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP), unknown facility staff, neglected a resident when the resident fell during a transfer and fractured the right tibia (lower leg bone.)”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP failed to follow the resident's care plan which directed staff to use two staff for a transfer. Instead, the AP transferred the resident alone and as a result, the resident fell during the transfer to the wheelchair and fractured her right leg.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed and internal investigation. The AP was interviewed and educated. Staff education was provided at stand-up meetings.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed July 24, 2023: 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 an individual was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- April 5, 2023 · report HL286052401M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when staff failed to administer the resident's diuretic medication (furosemide) for two weeks. The resident was hospitalized with respiratory distress.”
“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 resident did not receive furosemide (commonly known by the brand name Lasix) for sixteen days and was hospitalized with respiratory failure.”
Action taken by facility: “The nurses were re-educated and the facility implemented new processes on transcribing and communicating new physician orders.”
Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed March 7, 2023: 2 correction orders
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control standards including cleaning protocols during medication administration and blood glucose checks for two of two residents (R2 and R3), observed for blood sugar checks.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to ensure staff followed infection control standards including cleaning protocols during medication administration and blood glucose checks for two of two residents (R2 and R3), observed for blood sugar checks. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. [...]”
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 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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- April 14, 2025 · report HL286057242M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) financially exploited the resident when the AP took the resident's morning medications including narcotics, for personal use but reported she destroyed the medications in the sharp's container.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: financial exploitation inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was inconclusive. Due to incomplete and conflicting accounts of the incident, it could not be determined if maltreatment occurred.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident, updated the medical provider and provided education to facility staff regarding medication administration.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed February 18, 2025: no correction orders issued.
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- February 9, 2026 · report HL286057284M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when they failed to provide cares, services, and supervision. As a result, the resident fell and was hospitalized.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. The facility assessed and had services in place to assist with the resident's cares and supervision. Although the resident had an unwitnessed fall, staff were following the resident's plan of care. The resident did not sustain serious injuries, was transported to the hospital per the family member's request and was transferred to a higher level of care.”
Action taken by facility: “When the resident was found on the floor, the nurse was alerted and assessed the resident. The resident was transferred to the hospital for evaluation.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed January 13, 2026: 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 115 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 SUMMIT HILL SENIOR LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 421932
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-08-01
- Licensed capacity
- 115
- Licensee
- SUMMIT HILL SENIOR LIVING
- County
- Ramsey County
- Executive Director
- Tammy Kucera
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.
Executive Director name from public records we reviewed, as of Oct 12, 2026.
Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs
How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota
- Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)
Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 3.1 mi, nursing home 1.7 mi, pharmacy 0.1 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Woodwinds Hospital, Woodbury. 3.1 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Cerenity Marian of St Paul LLC, Saint Paul. 1.7 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Care Plus Home Health Agency Inc, Saint Paul. 1.2 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 0.1 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55119 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Sun Ray Dialysis Unit, Saint Paul, 0.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fmc Dialysis Services Of St Paul, Saint Paul, 0.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Phalen Dialysis, Saint Paul, 2.3 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 25 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55119.
Hospice Of The Midwest, office in Woodbury, 3.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
St Croix Hospice, office in Oakdale, 3.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 3.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 6.9 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 very low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively moderate, 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 September 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 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 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 |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Summit Hill Senior Living provide?
Summit Hill Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in St. Paul, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 115 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Summit Hill Senior Living?
No. We publish state licensing details for Summit Hill 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 Summit Hill 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. Summit Hill Senior Living does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Summit Hill Senior Living?
Use Summit Hill Senior Living's website, summithillseniorliving.com, or visit at 1824 Old Hudson Road, St. Paul, MN 55119.
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