Assisted Living and Memory Care
The Landmark of Fridley
6490 Central Avenue Ne, Fridley, MN 55432 · Map
Licensed for 75 residents · THE LANDMARK OF FRIDLEY
The Landmark of Fridley is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Fridley, Minnesota. It is licensed for 75 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, 75 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 421981, current license dated Oct 1, 2025. Licensee THE LANDMARK OF FRIDLEY.
Nearest emergency room
7.3 miles
North Memorial Health Hospital, rated 1 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Landmark of Fridley this community | 75 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Bright Path Homes, Central Avenue Ne | 0.2 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Fridley Assisted Living | 0.2 mi | 59 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Alliance Home & Care Provider | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Healing Homecare | 0.2 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 16, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 16, 2025, state report LYK211)
MDH: “On July 14, 2025, through July 16, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 16, 2025: 4 correction orders
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement a written staffing plan that included an evaluation completed by the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) (as indicated in Minnesota Administrative Rule 4659.0180) at least twice a year 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: 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 is 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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which included a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test, and a history and symptom screening for one of two employees unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention and control program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which included a two-step tuberculin skin test (TST) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test, and a history and symptom screening for one of two employees unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the administration of client medications by unlicensed personnel (ULP) followed acceptable standards for one of one employee (ULP-C) observed
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the administration of client medications by unlicensed personnel (ULP) followed acceptable standards for one of one employee (ULP-C) observed during medication pass. [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- February 24, 2023: report NRED11 · 9 correction orders
Details
Survey completed February 24, 2023: 9 correction orders
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to have a written emergency disaster plan with all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency disaster plan with all required content. This had the potential to affect all sixty six (66) residents receiving assisted living services, 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 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain 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.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain 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. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
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 [...]”
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, and failed to conduct the required evacuation drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on a record review and interview, the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, and failed to conduct the required evacuation drills. This had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 820: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (g) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide facilities that were not a distinct hazard to life. This had the potential to directly affect a limited number of residents and staff. [...]”
Rule cited: “(g) Existing construction or elements, including assisted living facilities that were registered as housing with services establishments under chapter 144D prior to August 1, 2021, shall be permitted to continue in use provided such use does not constitute a [...]”
- 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 for one of one resident (R2) hospitalized.
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 one resident (R2) hospitalized. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
Show all 9
- Tag 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a pre-admission comprehensive assessment to cover all parts of the uniform assessment tool for two of two residents (R3, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a pre-admission comprehensive assessment to cover all parts of the uniform assessment tool for two of two residents (R3, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- 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 assessment monitoring no more than 14 days after start of services for one of five residents (R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing resident assessment monitoring no more than 14 days after start of services for one of five residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored according to the manufacturer's recommended temperature.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored according to the manufacturer's recommended temperature. 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 [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care (ALFDC) were provided to residents and the residents' legal and designated representatives at the time of move in for five of five residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures for assisted living with dementia care (ALFDC) were provided to residents and the residents' legal and designated representatives at the time of move in for five of five residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
- 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
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- October 21, 2025 · report HL288875402M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility failed to administer physician ordered Parkinson's medication or treat a urinary tract infection (UTI), resulting in a fall and hospitalization.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. Although the resident fell and sustained fractures, the resident's service plan, and medication administration records were followed at the time the incident occurred. Additionally, when the resident showed signs of a UTI, the medical provider was updated, and the resident was treated with antibiotics.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility completed incident reports. The facility reported all documented incidents to the resident's family member(s). The facility reported, assessed and treated urinary tract infections.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed September 11, 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”
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 75 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 THE LANDMARK OF FRIDLEY
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 421981
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-01
- Licensed capacity
- 75
- Licensee
- THE LANDMARK OF FRIDLEY
- County
- Anoka County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Ranya Abueid
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 7.3 mi, nursing home 1.4 mi, pharmacy 1.5 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- North Memorial Health Hospital, Robbinsdale. 7.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 1 of 5 stars. Location approximate.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Benedictine Health Center Innsbruck, New Brighton. 1.4 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- All Homecaring Minnesota, Columbia Heights. 2.9 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- CVS Pharmacy. 1.5 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55432 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita East River Road Dialysis, Fridley, 2.5 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Kidney Care Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Center, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc Dialysis - North Suburban, Coon Rapids, 4.0 miles away, straight line (has a shift starting after 5 pm; CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 26 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55432.
Ecumen Hospice, office in Shoreview, 5.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Interim Healthcare Of The Twin Cities, Inc., office in Roseville, 5.2 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Presbyterian Homes Hospice Inc, office in Roseville, 5.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Allina Health System, Coon Rapids. 3.8 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, wildfire very low, tornado 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 current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
What we 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 | No plain statements of services found |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does The Landmark of Fridley provide?
The Landmark of Fridley is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Fridley, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 75 residents.
Does Lilisity rate The Landmark of Fridley?
No. We publish state licensing details for The Landmark of Fridley 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 The Landmark of Fridley 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. The Landmark of Fridley does not publish its prices.
How do I contact The Landmark of Fridley?
Use The Landmark of Fridley's website, landmarkoffridley.com, or visit at 6490 Central Avenue Ne, Fridley, MN 55432.
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