Assisted Living and Memory Care
The Shores of Lake Phalen
1870 East Shore Drive, Maplewood, MN 55109 · Map
Licensed for 105 residents · THE SHORES OF LAKE PHALEN
The Shores of Lake Phalen is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Maplewood, Minnesota. It is licensed for 105 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
Starting prices the community publishes, with the date we checked each one and a link to where it is published. Care charges are usually added after an assessment.
| Care | Starting at | Checked |
|---|---|---|
| Assisted Living | $3,600 /mo | Oct 12, 2026 |
| Memory Care | $7,600 /mo | Oct 12, 2026 |
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, 105 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 421904, current license dated Sep 1, 2025. Licensee THE SHORES OF LAKE PHALEN.
Nearest emergency room
2.5 miles
M Health Fairview St John'S Hospital, rated 5 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 Shores of Lake Phalen this community | 105 | $3,600/mo | Active | 2 substantiated | |
| Help Home Care | 0.8 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Metro Health Care Services | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Restore Living Well Home | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| Maplewood Assisted Living, Edgerton Street | 0.9 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- April 24, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 2 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (April 24, 2025, state report U4DH11)
MDH: “On April 21, 2025, through April 24, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed April 24, 2025: 6 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer to the FBEIR for any compliance dates
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
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, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain facility in compliance with Minnesota State Fire Code under Minnesota Rules Chapter 7511. This had the potential to 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 required content and provide required documentation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop the fire safety and evacuation plan with required content and provide required documentation. 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 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure eight hours of annual training was completed for each 12 months of employment, and included all required topics, for two of two employees (licensed assisted living director (LALD)-A and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure eight hours of annual training was completed for each 12 months of employment, and included all required topics, for two of two employees (licensed assisted living director (LALD)-A and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- 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 a hazard vulnerability assessment and provide required documentation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to a hazard vulnerability assessment and provide required documentation. 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; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- December 28, 2022: report RFU911 · 20 correction orders
Details
Survey completed December 28, 2022: 20 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
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 had the potential to affect all residents of the assisted living 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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. The licensee failed to ensure direct care staff appropriately gloved and performed adequate hand hygiene (HH) for 2 of 3 staff (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, ULP-I). [...]”
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 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a written emergency preparedness (EP) plan with all the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop 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 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 the interconnection of required smoke alarms in the one-bedroom resident apartment unit #318, combined resident apartment unit #335/333, and combined resident apartment unit #336/338.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide the interconnection of required smoke alarms in the one-bedroom resident apartment unit #318, combined resident apartment unit #335/333, and combined resident apartment unit #336/338. 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
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 20
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Fourteen (14) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide the complete content of the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum required evacuation drills, and the required employee training on fire safety and evacuation.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide the complete content of the fire safety and evacuation plan, the minimum required evacuation drills, and the required employee training on fire safety and evacuation. This has the potential to directly affect the safety of all residents receiving care, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 950: 144.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to offer the opportunity to identify a designated representative, on a separate form, including statutory language, 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 offer the opportunity to identify a designated representative, on a separate form, including statutory language, for five of five residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”
- Tag 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 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (a) Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations included all the required content, for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, ULP-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations included all the required content, for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, ULP-E). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Training and competency evaluations for all unlicensed personnel must include the following: (1) documentation requirements for all services provided; (2) reports of changes in the resident's condition to the supervisor designated by the facility; (3) [...]”
- Tag 1380: 144G.61 Subd. 2 (b) Training and evaluation of Level 2, isolated scope · correction period: Twenty-one
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations included all the required training for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations included all the required training for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “unlicensed personn (b) In addition to paragraph (a), training and competency evaluation for unlicensed personnel providing assisted living services must include: (1) observing, reporting, and documenting resident status; (2) basic knowledge of body [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated nursing or therapy tasks within 30 days of first providing those services for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with employee records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated nursing or therapy tasks within 30 days of first providing those services for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with employee records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include all required content for two of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-B, and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include all required content for two of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-B, and unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”
- Tag 1480: 144G.63 Subd. 3 Orientation to resident Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure staff providing assisted living services were oriented specifically to each individual resident and the services to be provided for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure staff providing assisted living services were oriented specifically to each individual resident and the services to be provided for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “Staff providing assisted living services must be oriented specifically to each individual resident and the services to be provided. This orientation may be provided in person, orally, in writing, or electronically.”
- Tag 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) was trained and had demonstrated competency to prepare and give medications for residents having unplanned time away.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to ensure one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) was trained and had demonstrated competency to prepare and give medications for residents having unplanned time away. [...]”
Rule cited: “(2) for unplanned time away, when the pharmacy is not able to provide the medications, a licensed nurse or unlicensed personnel shall provide medications in amounts and dosages needed for the length of the anticipated absence, not to exceed seven calendar [...]”
- Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to store medications according to the manufacturer's directions for two of two residents (R3, R4) who required insulin.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to store medications according to the manufacturer's directions for two of two residents (R3, R4) who required insulin. [...]”
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 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 medications were maintained, including the opened date for time sensitive medication storage for one of two residents (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were maintained, including the opened date for time sensitive medication storage for one of two residents (R4). [...]”
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 four residents (R4) receiving treatment services.
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 four residents (R4) receiving treatment services. [...]”
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 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on document review and interview, 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 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 the assisted living facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to five of five residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, and R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the assisted living facility with dementia care provided the required policies and procedures to five of five residents (R1, R2, R3, R4, and 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 [...]”
- Tag 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, licensee failed to develop an individualized activity plan for each resident based on their activity evaluation. Further, the licensee failed to include a selection of daily activities on the resident's activity service or care plan for two of two residents (R4, R5) who resided on the dementia care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.
- 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)
- December 22, 2022 · report HL290041206M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) financially exploited the resident when a check was written to the AP for $25,000 dollars.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: financial exploitation substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP wrote a check out to herself and forged the resident's spouse's signature. The AP cashed the check in the amount of $25,000 dollars.”
Action taken by facility: “Leadership placed the AP on suspension and spoke with law enforcement. Leadership provided vulnerable adult education to staff. The AP was no longer employed by the facility.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed October 17, 2022: 3 correction orders
- Tag 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) that included an individualized review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) that included an individualized review or assessment of the person's susceptibility to abuse by another individual for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews, and document review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one resident reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. R1 was financially exploited. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination that financially exploitation occurred, and that an individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incident which occurred at the facility. [...]”
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 2480: 144G.91 Subd. 20 Grievances and inquiries Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: twenty one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to investigate an allegation of financial exploitation that occurred to one of one resident (R1), to determine if financial explotation occurred to all other residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to investigate an allegation of financial exploitation that occurred to one of one resident (R1), to determine if financial explotation occurred to all other residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to make and receive a timely response to a complaint or inquiry, without limitation. [...]”
- Tag 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
- August 11, 2022 · report HL29004001C
Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
- June 16, 2025 · report HL290042063M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when he had falls that resulted in a right hip fracture.”
“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 falls were not foreseeable events. The facility staff were following the resident's plan of care at the time of the falls. Staff notified the resident's provider, provided proper medical care, and placed interventions in attempt to prevent future falls.”
Action taken by facility: “Staff notified the resident's provider and ensured medical care was obtained as needed. Staff implemented some fall interventions.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed June 2, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document personalized fall prevention interventions, as required for 2 of 2 residents (R1, R2) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to document personalized fall prevention interventions, as required for 2 of 2 residents (R1, R2) reviewed. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death) and was issued at a pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are [...]”
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
- June 13, 2025 · report HL290042062M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when they failed to assess the resident after a change in condition, resulting in additional falls and injury.”
“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 staff assessed the resident after falls, notified the provider and family, provided medical care as necessary. The facility assessed the resident for change in condition upon her return from the hospital.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility provided medical care as required and provided the needed care with the resident's change in condition.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed June 2, 2025: 1 correction order
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document personalized fall prevention interventions, as required for 2 of 2 residents (R1, R2) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to document personalized fall prevention interventions, as required for 2 of 2 residents (R1, R2) reviewed. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death) and was issued at a pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are [...]”
Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
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 105 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 SHORES OF LAKE PHALEN
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 421904
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-09-01
- Licensed capacity
- 105
- Licensee
- THE SHORES OF LAKE PHALEN
- County
- Ramsey County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Dawn Mount
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 2.5 mi, nursing home 1.0 mi, pharmacy 1.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview St John'S Hospital, Maplewood. 2.5 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Good Samaritan Society - Maplewood, Saint Paul. 1.0 mile away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Care Plus Home Health Agency Inc, Saint Paul. 2.7 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55109 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Phalen Dialysis, Saint Paul, 2.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Fmc Dialysis - Roseville, Roseville, 2.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Maplewood Dialysis Center, Maplewood, 2.8 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 25 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55109.
Suite Living Hospice, LLC, office in White Bear Lake, 3.5 miles away, straight line
Beyond Hospice, office in Oakdale, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Presbyterian Homes Hospice Inc, office in Roseville, 5.3 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Saint Paul. 6.0 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire very low, tornado relatively 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?
- Your published starting price is a base rate. What would the total monthly cost be for my parent's needs?
- How much have prices gone up in each of the last three years?
- 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 | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does The Shores of Lake Phalen provide?
The Shores of Lake Phalen is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Maplewood, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 105 residents.
Does Lilisity rate The Shores of Lake Phalen?
No. We publish state licensing details for The Shores of Lake Phalen 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 Shores of Lake Phalen 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 starting prices it publishes are in the Prices section on this page.
How do I contact The Shores of Lake Phalen?
Use The Shores of Lake Phalen's website, sonidaseniorliving.com/community/shores-of-lake-phalen, or visit at 1870 East Shore Drive, Maplewood, MN 55109.
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