Assisted Living and Memory Care
The Waters on Mayowood
827 Mayowood Road Sw, Rochester, MN 55902 · Map
Licensed for 232 residents · THE WATERS ON MAYOWOOD
The Waters on Mayowood is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Rochester, Minnesota. It is licensed for 232 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, 232 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 425143, current license dated May 15, 2026. Licensee THE WATERS ON MAYOWOOD.
Nearest emergency room
1.6 miles
Mayo Clinic Hospital Rochester, 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 Waters on Mayowood this community | 232 | Not published | Active | 2 substantiated | |
| Adapta, 5th Street Sw | 0.6 mi | 18 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Marcella Manor | 0.6 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Quality Living Care | 0.6 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Essence Care Center | 1.5 mi | 4 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- October 24, 2024
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 3 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (October 24, 2024, state report M2WA11)
MDH: “On October 21, 2024, through October 24, 2024, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed October 24, 2024: 6 correction orders
- Tag 480: 144G.41 Subd 1 (13) (i) (B) Minimum requirements 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: “(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 970: 144G.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · 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 facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for five of five residents (R2, R4, R5, R6, R7).
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 facility's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident for five of five residents (R2, R4, R5, R6, R7). This had the potential to affect all current residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 TRAINING IN DEMENTIA CARE REQUIRED 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 three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H) received the required amount of dementia care training in the required time frame. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 120 working hours of the employment start [...]”
- 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 an assessment for a change in condition for two of five residents (R4, R7).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an assessment for a change in condition for two of five residents (R4, R7). [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- 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 specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for one of five residents (R7) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for as needed (PRN) medications and documented those instructions for one of five residents (R7) for medication administration delegated to unlicensed personnel. [...]”
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 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 included a proper label and open date for two of eleven residents (R1, R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications included a proper label and open date for two of eleven residents (R1, R2). [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- March 17, 2022: report LT6R11 · 14 correction orders
Details
Survey completed March 17, 2022: 14 correction orders
- Tag 580: 144G.42 Subd. 2 Quality management Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to engage in and maintain documentation of quality management activity appropriate to the size and relevant to the type of services provided by the assisted living.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to engage in and maintain documentation of quality management activity appropriate to the size and relevant to the type of services provided by the assisted living. This had the potential to affect all 216 residents receiving assisted living services. [...]”
Rule cited: “The facility shall engage in quality management appropriate to the size of the facility and relevant to the type of services provided. [...]”
- Tag 640: 144G.42 Subd. 7 Posting information for reporting suspected c Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to support protection and safety by not posting information and phone numbers for reporting to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) as required.
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 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 interview and record review the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all the required content. This had the potential to affect all current 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 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
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, 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 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 facility'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 facility's liability for health, safety or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
Show all 14
- Tag 1370: 144G.61 Subd. 2 Training and evaluation of unlicensed personn Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the license failed to ensure training and competency evaluations contained all the required training prior to providing direct care for one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 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 evaluations contained all the required training prior to providing direct care for one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure training and competency evaluations contained all the required training prior to providing direct care for one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 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 unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record observation, interview, and record review, 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 unlicensed personnel (ULP-E) with 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 one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services with records reviewed. [...]”
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 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 reassessment not to exceed 90 days for one of six residents (R2) as required with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a reassessment not to exceed 90 days for one of six residents (R2) as required with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- 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 label time sensitive medications with an opened date for one of five residents (R8) who received medication management services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to label time sensitive medications with an opened date for one of five residents (R8) who received medication management services. [...]”
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 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 conduct a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct a hazard vulnerability or safety risk assessment on or around the facility property. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 1, 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 designated representatives and/or residents.
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 designated representatives and/or residents. [...]”
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, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure residents were evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility and based on the activity evaluation, the license failed to develop an individualized activity plan for six of six residents, (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 and R6) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure residents were evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility and based on the activity evaluation, the license failed to develop an individualized activity plan for six of six residents, (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5 and R6) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 580: 144G.42 Subd. 2 Quality management Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- September 14, 2023 · report HL314741201C
Details
Survey completed July 18, 2023: 1 correction order
- 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 respond to the grievances of one of one resident (R4) reviewed for grievances.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to respond to the grievances of one of one resident (R4) reviewed for grievances. 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 of the [...]”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to make and receive a timely response to a complaint or inquiry, without limitation. [...]”
- Tag 2480: 144G.91 Subd. 20 Grievances and inquiries Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) Days
- September 14, 2023 · report HL314746967M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected a resident when the resident fell, pressed her call light, and was not found by staff for ten hours. The resident's call light was not operational at the time of the incident. The resident was hospitalized and diagnosed with a cervical spine fracture.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”
“The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility was aware of call pendant system malfunctions but failed to ensure proper functionality of the system. The resident fell and, despite activating her call pendant for assistance, remained on the floor for approximately ten hours before being found by staff the next morning. The resident sustained head trauma, multiple rib and cervical fractures, and died approximately one month later. The facility identified the resident's call pendant was not functional at the time of the fall and discovered additional call pendant functionality issues but failed to establish interventions to ensure system repairs were made and the system remained in proper working order. An equal opportunity employer.”
Action taken by facility: “After the onsite visit, the facility notified the call light company and checked all resident pendants. The facility is now conducting random audits and have created new steps to ensure call light functionality.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed July 19, 2023: 3 correction orders
- Tag 460: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to promptly respond to
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to promptly respond to requests for assistance following a fall with significant injury for one of one resident (R1) reviewed. The licensee also failed to ensure the call light system was properly maintained to meet the scheduled and unscheduled needs of each resident and respond to requests for assistance of health or safety needs within a reasonable amount of time. This had the ability to affect all 206 residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(5) provide a means for residents to request assistance for health and safety needs 24 hours per day, seven days per week; (6) allow residents the ability to furnish and decorate the resident's unit within the terms of the assisted living contract; (7) permit [...]”
- Tag 970: 144G.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. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details.”
Rule cited: “Residents have the right to be free from physical, sexual, and emotional abuse; neglect; financial exploitation; and all forms of maltreatment covered under the Vulnerable Adults Act.”
- Tag 460: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Unsubstantiated investigations (3)
- August 13, 2026 · report HL314742924M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused the resident when they physically restrained her so another staff member could administer medication.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was not substantiated. The resident had aggressive, combative behavior which posed a risk to other residents, so multiple staff attempted to give her prescribed anti-psychotic medication. At one point during this process, the AP held the resident's arms/hands to prevent her from hitting an unlicensed personnel (ULP). Although the AP's behavior restrained the resident's movement, this event was brief, done in therapeutic conduct, and the resident suffered no harm.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility provided re-education to staff.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken.”
Survey completed August 5, 2026: no correction orders issued.
- May 22, 2024 · report HL314749805M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when the facility did not respond to the resident's call light leading to the resident to call 911 for his own hospitalization. Additionally, the facility neglected the resident when the facility did not provide catheter cares and/or medication administration.”
“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 did call 911 on his own, the facility was following the resident's plan of care and facility policy and procedures were being followed.”
Action taken by facility: “Resident hospitalized and discharged to a needed higher level of care.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed May 1, 2024: no correction orders issued.
- December 20, 2023 · report HL314748971M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when unlicensed personnel discovered resident deceased in his apartment.”
“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 documented the resident had a recent decline in health and the resident was scheduled to be admitted to hospice that day.”
Action taken by facility: “No action required.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action required.”
Survey completed November 14, 2023: no correction orders issued.
What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)
Level 1: “a violation that has no potential to cause more than a minimal impact on the resident and does not affect health or safety”
Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”
Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”
Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”
Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”
Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”
Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.
What these terms mean
MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”
“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”
For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).
Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.
MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 232 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 ON MAYOWOOD
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 425143
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-05-15
- Licensed capacity
- 232
- Licensee
- THE WATERS ON MAYOWOOD
- County
- Olmsted 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 1.6 mi, nursing home 1.6 mi, pharmacy 0.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Mayo Clinic Hospital Rochester, Rochester. 1.6 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Rochester Restorative Care Center, Rochester. 1.6 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Aveanna Home Health, Rochester. 3.0 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Hy-Vee Pharmacy. 0.4 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55902 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita Rochester Dialysis, Rochester, 1.4 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Mayo Clinic Dialysis St Marys, Rochester, 1.6 miles away, straight line
Mayo Dialysis Rochester Methodist Hosp, Rochester, 1.7 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 7 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55902.
Seasons Hospice, office in Rochester, 0.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Moments Hospice, office in Rochester, 1.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 1 of 5 stars)
Crown Capital Strategies, LLC, office in Rochester, 3.1 miles away, straight line - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Mayo Clinic, Rochester. 1.6 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 high, wildfire very 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 2026. 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 | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does The Waters on Mayowood provide?
The Waters on Mayowood is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Rochester, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 232 residents.
Does Lilisity rate The Waters on Mayowood?
No. We publish state licensing details for The Waters on Mayowood 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 on Mayowood 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 on Mayowood does not publish its prices.
How do I contact The Waters on Mayowood?
Use The Waters on Mayowood's website, thewaters.com/locations/the-waters-mayowood, or visit at 827 Mayowood Road Sw, Rochester, MN 55902.
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