Lilisity

Assisted Living and Memory Care

Twin Town Villa

615 Durum Drive, Breckenridge, MN 56520 · Map
Licensed for 90 residents · TWIN TOWN VILLA

State license active
Is this your community? Claim this listing

Twin Town Villa is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Breckenridge, Minnesota. It is licensed for 90 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care
90 residentsLicensed capacity
State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care
$2,200 to $4,800/moTypical assisted living start in Minnesota, from 74 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

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.
Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Care and services

From the community’s website

What Twin Town Villa says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.

  • Apartment types named: cottage or villa. At Twin Town Villa, we are dedicated to providing consistent and compassionate service to our Assisted Living, Memory Care, and Care Suites. (page, checked Oct 12, 2026)

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.

State inspections

0Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: Mar 10, 2025. See the record

License

Active, 90 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 424666, current license dated May 1, 2026. Licensee TWIN TOWN VILLA.

Nearest emergency room

4.3 miles

St Francis Medical Center.

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.

CommunityDistanceLicensed capacityPublished starting priceLicenseInspection citations
Twin Town Villa this community90Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Leach Home1.1 mi39Not publishedActiveNo record
Siena Court1.1 mi16Not publishedActiveNo record
Mill Street Residence24.5 mi64Not publishedActive0 substantiated
Pioneercare Memory Cottages25.1 mi52Not publishedActive0 substantiated
State inspection record0 substantiated
Last evaluation
March 10, 2025
Evaluations on record
2
Investigations substantiated
0 kept 7 years
Inconclusive
0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated
0 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (March 10, 2025, state report QN3S11)

MDH: “On March 10, 2025, through March 12, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”

Survey completed March 12, 2025: 5 correction orders

  • 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.

    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. [...]”

  • Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a current background study clearance letter for one of five employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure current employee records contained all the required content to include a current background study clearance letter for one of five employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). This had the potential to affect all residents living within the facility. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”

  • 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 refrigerators storing medications maintained an acceptable temperature and medications were stored according to manufacturer's recommended temperature.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two refrigerators storing medications maintained an acceptable temperature and medications were stored according to manufacturer's recommended temperature. [...]”

    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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to document in the resident's record all required content for disposition of the medications for one of one resident (R1) upon discharge.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to document in the resident's record all required content for disposition of the medications for one of one resident (R1) upon discharge. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Any current medications being managed by the assisted living facility must be provided to the resident when the resident's service plan ends or medication management services are no longer part of the service plan. [...]”

  • Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) 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 ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards with regards to safely storing oxygen for one of one resident (R14).

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards with regards to safely storing oxygen for one of one resident (R14). [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

Fines assessed by MDH

  • Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.

Earlier evaluations (1)
  • October 26, 2022: report BEHN11 · 17 correction orders
    Details

    Survey completed October 26, 2022: 17 correction orders

    • Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 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 the staffing plan was posted in the memory care unit, potentially affecting 17of the licensee's current residents, staff and visitors.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to ensure the staffing plan was posted in the memory care unit, potentially affecting 17of the licensee's current residents, staff and visitors. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”

    • Tag 480: 144G.41 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: (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 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 post required content in the memory care unit to include information and the number to report suspected maltreatment of a vulnerable adult.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to post required content in the memory care unit to include information and the number to report suspected maltreatment of a vulnerable adult. This had the potential to affect all 17 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 observation and interview the licensee failed to post emergency exit diagrams in prominent areas in the locked memory care unit or on the second floor of the assisted living building. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving services under the assisted living with dementia license. [...]”

      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 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 the resident record included a discharge summary for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included a discharge summary for one of one resident (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”

      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, [...]”

    Show all 17
    • Tag 970: 144.50 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.

      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. [...]”

    • Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative; and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) when the resident did not return from the emergency relocation within four days for two of two residents (R2, R6).

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with required content to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative; and failed to provide the notification to the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) when the resident did not return from the emergency relocation within four days for two of two residents (R2, R6). [...]”

      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 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of five residents

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of five residents (R10) service plan was revised to include provided services. 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 affected, more than a [...]”

      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 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 provide specific resident instructions relating to the administration of medications for one of four residents (R5) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide specific resident instructions relating to the administration of medications for one of four residents (R5) with records reviewed. [...]”

      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 1760: 144G.71 Subd. 8 Documentation of administration of medication Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as directed for one of four residents (R6) with records reviewed.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as directed for one of four residents (R6) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Each medication administered by the assisted living facility staff must be documented in the resident's record. The documentation must include the signature and title of the person who administered the medication. [...]”

    • Tag 1770: 144G.71 Subd. 9 Documentation of medication setup Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure documentation of medication setup was completed accurately

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure documentation of medication setup was completed accurately and/or updated with changes for one of one resident (R10) with records reviewed. [...]”

      Rule cited: “Documentation of dates of medication setup, name of medication, quantity of dose, times to be administered, route of administration, and name of person completing medication setup must be done at the time of setup.”

    • Tag 1970: 144G.72 Subd. 6 Treatment and therapy orders Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for one of one resident (R3) who received treatments managed be the provider.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure up-to-date written or electronically recorded orders were maintained for one of one resident (R3) who received treatments managed be the provider. [...]”

      Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”

    • 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 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 develop an individualized activity plan for one of two residents (R7) who resided in an assisted living with dementia care facility.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized activity plan for one of two residents (R7) who resided in an 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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 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 provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medication or nursing standards for one of five residents (R10) with medication management.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medication or nursing standards for one of five residents (R10) with medication management. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

    • Tag 2410: 144G.91 Subd. 13 Personal and treatment privacy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
      Details

      Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure privacy was maintained for one of four residents (R7) observed during medication administration.

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure privacy was maintained for one of four residents (R7) observed during medication administration. [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to consideration of their privacy, individuality, and cultural identity as related to their social, religious, and psychological well-being. [...]”

    • Tag 2430: 144G.91 Subd. 15 Confidentiality of records Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
      Details

      MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview the licensee failed to ensure resident's medical information was kept private. 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 number of staff are involved [...]”

      Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to have personal, financial, health, and medical information kept private, to approve or refuse release of information to any outside party, and to be advised of the assisted living facility's policies and procedures regarding [...]”

    From MDH’s letter: no immediate fines.

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 90 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 TWIN TOWN VILLA
License type
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number
424666
License status
Active
Current license dated
2026-05-01
Licensed capacity
90
Licensee
TWIN TOWN VILLA
Administrator/Authorized Agent
Jacob Work

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 4.3 mi, nursing home 0.8 mi, pharmacy 23.2 mi
Nearest hospital with an emergency room
St Francis Medical Center, Breckenridge. 4.3 miles away, straight line. Location approximate.
Nearest Medicare nursing home
St Francis Home, Breckenridge. 0.8 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office
Benedictine Home Health, Wahpeton. 1.1 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy
Thrift White Pharmacy. 23.2 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area
USDA classes ZIP code 56520 as micropolitan (micropolitan core).
Hospice
3 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56520.
Chi Health At Home, office in Breckenridge, 1.5 miles away, straight line
Nearest geriatric medicine practice
Tapestry Telehealth PLLC, Fargo. 39.6 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 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
Zone X: Area protected by a levee from the 1% annual chance flood (moderate risk). (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 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.

  1. The current license dates from 2026. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
  2. What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
  3. How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
  4. What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
  5. How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
  6. How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
  7. What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
  8. What fees are charged at move-in?
  9. How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
  10. 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.

SourceData as ofWhat we found
Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection recordsSep 28, 2026See above
U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour casesOct 15, 2026Nothing on record
OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016Oct 15, 2026Nothing on record
FEMA flood mapSee above
USDA wildfire riskApr 15, 2026Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here very low
FEMA National Risk IndexSee above
CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmaciesSee above
HUD Multifamily Properties - AssistedJul 6, 2026Nothing on record
State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory)Sep 20, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Hospice - General InformationAug 19, 2026Nothing on record
CMS Home Health Care AgenciesMay 27, 2026Nothing on record
The community’s own websiteSee above
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Twin Town Villa provide?

Twin Town Villa is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Breckenridge, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 90 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Twin Town Villa?

No. We publish state licensing details for Twin Town Villa 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 Twin Town Villa 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. Twin Town Villa does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Twin Town Villa?

Use Twin Town Villa's website, twintownvilla.com, or visit at 615 Durum Drive, Breckenridge, MN 56520.

Choosing assisted livingOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

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