Assisted Living and Memory Care
The Waters of Kingsley Shores
16880 Klamath Trail, Lakeville, MN 55044 · Map
Licensed for 116 residents · THE WATERS OF KINGSLEY SHORES
The Waters of Kingsley Shores is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Lakeville, Minnesota. It is licensed for 116 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, 116 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422062, current license dated Aug 28, 2025. Licensee THE WATERS OF KINGSLEY SHORES.
Nearest emergency room
3.3 miles
M Health Fairview Ridges 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Waters of Kingsley Shores this community | 116 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| The Moments of Lakeville | 0.8 mi | 99 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Timeless Home Care | 1.0 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | No record |
| The Fountains at Hosanna | 1.6 mi | 108 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| The Geneva Suites, Wildwood Court | 1.9 mi | 6 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- November 20, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 1 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (November 20, 2024, state report BVB211)
MDH: “On November 18, 2024, through November 20, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider for a change of ownership.”
Survey completed November 20, 2024: 17 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 550: 144G.41 Subd. 7 Resident grievances; reporting maltreatment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place, information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to post in a conspicuous place, information about the licensee's grievance procedure with the required content. This had the potential to affect the licensee's current residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “All facilities must post in a conspicuous place information about the facilities' grievance procedure, and the name, telephone number, and email contact information for the individuals who are responsible for handling resident grievances. [...]”
- Tag 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for reporting to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) as required. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
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 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one discharged resident's record (R4) included a discharge summary.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one discharged resident's record (R4) included a discharge summary. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only [...]”
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 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for two of three residents (R1 and R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for two of three residents (R1 and R2). [...]”
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 [...]”
Show all 17
- Tag 970: 144G.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · 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 for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3).
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 for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
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, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) to include all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) to include all required content. [...]”
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 unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) to include all required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency was completed for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) to include all required content. [...]”
Rule cited: “(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 functioning and changes in [...]”
- 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 direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks was provided within 30 calendar days after the date on which the individual begins working for the licensee for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame. [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care employees must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed 90 days for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed 90 days for three of three residents (R1, R2, and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for two of three residents (R2 and R3).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for two of three residents (R2 and R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of three residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management plan with the required content for one of three residents (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the medication management services that will be provided to the resident. [...]”
- 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 registered nurse documented resident-specific instructions for one of three residents (R2) whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse documented resident-specific instructions for one of three residents (R2) whose medication administration was delegated to unlicensed personnel (ULP). [...]”
Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”
- Tag 1790: 144G.71 Subd. 10 Medication management for residents who will Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed training and competencies for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D)
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) developed training and competencies for one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) providing medications to residents for unplanned time away from home when the licensed nurse was not available. [...]”
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 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 two of
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 two of three residents (R1 and R3). [...]”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA 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 conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for two of two residents (R1 and R2) who received services under the assisted living with dementia care license and resided in the secure memory care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 6, 2023: report TR7Q11 · 9 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 9, 2023: 9 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 practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(13) offer to provide or make available at least the following services to residents: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) 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 immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for two of two residents (R9, R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for two of two residents (R9, R8). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”
- Tag 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan was developed to include the required content for four of five residents (R3, R2, R4, and R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan was developed to include the required content for four of five residents (R3, R2, R4, and R6). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation for
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content for an emergency relocation for three of three residents (R2, R4, R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a change in condition assessment after a return from the hospital for one of one resident (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a change in condition assessment after a return from the hospital for one of one resident (R4). In addition, the RN failed to complete a 14-day assessment timely for one of one resident (R2). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
Show all 9
- 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 registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions for one of five resident (R3) who received medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) prepared in writing specific instructions for one of five resident (R3) who received medication administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”
- Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R7, R6) insulins were stored securely and according to the manufacturer's recommendations.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two residents' (R7, R6) insulins were stored securely and according to the manufacturer's recommendations. [...]”
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 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions, and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for one of two residents (R2) who resided in the assisted living with dementia care facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions, and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for one of two residents (R2) who resided in the assisted living with dementia care facility. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
- Tag 3000: 626.557 Subd. 3 Timing of report Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for two of two residents (R9, R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment for two of two residents (R9, R8). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”
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
Unsubstantiated investigations (1)
- July 17, 2024 · report HL294701840M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected the resident when the AP observed signs of a stroke, failed to assess the resident and call emergency medical services for two hours.”
“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. During the AP's initial assessment, the resident was assessed to have equal strength, able to communicate but was tired and weak The AP planned to have the resident evaluated by the resident's primary care provider (PCP) that morning. An hour later when the AP received report of further decline with observable symptoms, she directed a registered nurse (RN) to assess the resident. The facility staff called emergency medical services and the resident transported to the hospital.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility nurses assessed the resident during a change in condition and sent the resident to the hospital.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed June 4, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to obtain vital signs for one of one residents (R1) with a change in condition.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to obtain vital signs for one of one residents (R1) with a change in condition. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) 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 116 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 WATERS OF KINGSLEY SHORES
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422062
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-08-28
- Licensed capacity
- 116
- Licensee
- THE WATERS OF KINGSLEY SHORES
- County
- Dakota County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Heidi Elliott
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 3.3 mi, nursing home 3.6 mi, pharmacy 0.8 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Ridges Hospital, Burnsville. 3.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 4 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Ebenezer Ridges Geriatric Care Center, Burnsville. 3.6 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Community Home Health Inc, Savage. 5.0 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- CVS Pharmacy. 0.8 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55044 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Burnsville Dialysis Unit, Burnsville, 3.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Fresenius Medical Care - Lakeville, Lakeville, 3.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 5 of 5 stars)
Davita Lakeville Dialysis, Lakeville, 3.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 26 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55044.
Minnesota Hospice LLC, office in Lakeville, 0.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 5 of 5 stars)
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 11.0 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Caretenders Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 11.4 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Fairview Health Services, Burnsville. 3.2 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 moderate, wildfire relatively low, tornado relatively high, heat wave relatively low, 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 relatively low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does The Waters of Kingsley Shores provide?
The Waters of Kingsley Shores is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Lakeville, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 116 residents.
Does Lilisity rate The Waters of Kingsley Shores?
No. We publish state licensing details for The Waters of Kingsley Shores 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 Waters of Kingsley Shores 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 Waters of Kingsley Shores does not publish its prices.
How do I contact The Waters of Kingsley Shores?
Use The Waters of Kingsley Shores's website, thewaters.com/locations/kingsley, or visit at 16880 Klamath Trail, Lakeville, MN 55044.
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