Assisted Living
Valley View Assisted Living of
1005 Milwaukee Street, Lakefield, MN 56150 · Map
Licensed for 23 residents · VALLEY VIEW ASSISTED LIVING OF LAKEFIELD
Valley View Assisted Living of is a state-licensed assisted living community in Lakefield, Minnesota. It is licensed for 23 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
Care and services
From the community’s website
What Valley View Assisted Living of says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
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, 23 residents
Assisted Living Facility 422563, current license dated Dec 1, 2025. Licensee VALLEY VIEW ASSISTED LIVING OF LAKEFIELD.
Nearest emergency room
9.2 miles
Sanford Jackson 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.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Valley View Assisted Living of this community | 23 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Good Samaritan Society- the Pi | 9.1 mi | 38 | $1,456/mo | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Good Samaritan Society Windom | 12.3 mi | 26 | $1,668/mo | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Pine View Assisted Living | 12.6 mi | 10 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| WEL-Life at Spirit Lake | 18.6 mi | 53 | Not published | Active | No record |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- April 29, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (April 29, 2026, state report OJNX11)
MDH: “On April 27, 2026, through April 29, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed April 29, 2026: 4 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, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $1,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted through the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) NETStudy 2.0 and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for three of three employees (billing specialist (BSP) -G, data entry (DE)-H, DE-I).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a background study was submitted through the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) NETStudy 2.0 and received in affiliation with the assisted living license for three of three employees (billing specialist (BSP) -G, data entry (DE)-H, DE-I). This resulted in an immediate correction order on April 27, 2026. [...]”
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 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered according to policy and accepted standards of practice for two of two residents (R2, R4) receiving diclofenac gel (pain relief) and for the licensee's one resident (R3) receiving insulin administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered according to policy and accepted standards of practice for two of two residents (R2, R4) receiving diclofenac gel (pain relief) and for the licensee's one resident (R3) receiving insulin administration. [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $1,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- May 31, 2023: report XD7T11 · 13 correction orders
Details
Survey completed May 31, 2023: 13 correction orders
- 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) and failed to post the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, 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) and failed to post the 911 emergency number in common areas and near telephones provided by the assisted living facility. 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 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included documentation of a completed health history and symptom screening, including completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must establish and maintain a comprehensive tuberculosis infection control program according to the most current tuberculosis infection control guidelines issued by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division [...]”
- Tag 680: 144G.42 Subd. 10 Disaster planning and emergency preparedness Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct two full scale drills in the last year.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct two full scale drills in the last year. This had the potential to affect all residents. 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 [...]”
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 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R1).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
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 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 two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations in all required training topics.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations in all required training topics. [...]”
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) [...]”
Show all 13
- 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 two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations in all required training topics.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-C and ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations in all required training topics. [...]”
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 1470: 144G.63 Subd. 2 Content of required orientation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received orientation to include the required content for two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C and ULP-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The orientation must contain the following topics: (1) an overview of this chapter; (2) an introduction and review of the facility's policies and procedures related to the provision of assisted living services by the individual staff person; (3) handling [...]”
- Tag 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 ensure individual medication management plan included medication set up services for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure individual medication management plan included medication set up services for one of one resident (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 one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations for medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations for medication administration. In addition, ULP-C failed to complete an air shot according to manufacturer directions prior to administering insulin from an insulin pen for one of one resident (R3). [...]”
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 one of one medication refrigerator was securely locked permitting only authorized personnel to have access.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one medication refrigerator was securely locked permitting only authorized personnel to have access. This had the potential to affect all residents residing in the facility. In addition, the licensee failed to ensure refrigerated medications were stored at the appropriate temperature in one of one medication refrigerator. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”
- Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened, and had a pharmacy label in two of two medication carts (A and B) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened, and had a pharmacy label in two of two medication carts (A and B) reviewed. [...]”
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 1950: 144G.72 Subd. 4 Administration of treatments and therapy Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations for blood glucose monitoring.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-D) completed training and competency evaluations for blood glucose monitoring. [...]”
Rule cited: “Ordered or prescribed treatments or therapies must be administered by a nurse, physician, or other licensed health professional authorized to perform the treatment or therapy, or may be delegated or assigned to unlicensed personnel by the licensed health [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: IMMEDIATE · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R2, R4) with side rails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical, or nursing standards for two of two residents (R2, R4) with side rails. This resulted in an immediate order issued on May 24, 2023, at 12:35 p.m. [...]”
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 2310 (144g.91 Subd. 4 (a) - Appropriate Care And Services): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
- 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
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”
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 23 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 VALLEY VIEW ASSISTED LIVING OF LAKEFIELD
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility
- License number
- 422563
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-12-01
- Licensed capacity
- 23
- Licensee
- VALLEY VIEW ASSISTED LIVING OF LAKEFIELD
- County
- Jackson County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Lexi Titterington
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 9.2 mi, nursing home 0.1 mi, pharmacy 18.3 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- Sanford Jackson Medical Center, Jackson. 9.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Colonial Manor Nursing Home, Lakefield. 0.1 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Good Sam Society Home Care Of Sw Mn, Windom. 12.7 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Hy-Vee Pharmacy. 18.3 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56150 as rural (rural area).
- Hospice
- 3 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56150.
- Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Hutchinson Health, Hutchinson. 91.1 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
- Area not mapped by FEMA. (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively moderate. 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 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?
- Who gives medications, and what training do they have?
- For what reasons can a resident be asked to leave?
- Is the apartment held during a hospital stay, and at what cost?
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 | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Valley View Assisted Living of provide?
Valley View Assisted Living of is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living in Lakefield, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 23 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Valley View Assisted Living of?
No. We publish state licensing details for Valley View Assisted Living of 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 Valley View Assisted Living of 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. Valley View Assisted Living of does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Valley View Assisted Living of?
Use Valley View Assisted Living of's website, valleyviewmn.com, or visit at 1005 Milwaukee Street, Lakefield, MN 56150.
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