Assisted Living and Memory Care
Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard
511 Dekalb Street, Redwood Falls, MN 56283 · Map
Licensed for 92 residents · VISTA PRAIRIE AT GARNETTE GARDENS
Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Redwood Falls, Minnesota. It is licensed for 92 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, 92 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 426097, current license dated Aug 1, 2026. Licensee VISTA PRAIRIE AT GARNETTE GARDENS.
State inspection record2 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- October 23, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 2 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (October 23, 2025, state report JKLS11)
MDH: “On October 20, 2025, through October 23, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed October 23, 2025: 6 correction orders
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment 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 comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the current Minnesota Fire Code Provisions. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 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 two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, ULP-D) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure two of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C, ULP-D) received orientation to assisted living facility licensing requirements and regulations before providing services. [...]”
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 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 a written service plan was revised to reflect the current
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written service plan was revised to reflect the current services provided for three of four residents (R3, R4, R5). [...]”
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 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 included all the required content for one of one resident (R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure documentation of medication setup included all the required content for one of one resident (R4). [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored according to the manufacturer's recommendations in one of two medication refrigerators.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were stored according to the manufacturer's recommendations in one of two medication refrigerators. [...]”
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 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for one of one resident (R2) with a safety lancet.
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 one of one resident (R2) with a safety lancet. [...]”
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.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd.2. (a) - Fire Protection And PhysicalEnvironment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- December 8, 2022: report 11SO11 · 15 correction orders
Details
Survey completed December 8, 2022: 15 correction orders
- Tag 110: 144G.10 Subdivision 1a Assisted living director license required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed as the Director of Record with the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports (BELTSS).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensed assisted living director (LALD) was listed as the Director of Record with the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports (BELTSS). This had the potential to affect all the licensee's residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must employ an assisted living director licensed or permitted by the Board of Executives for Long Term Services and Supports.”
- 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 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $3,000.00 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.
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. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. This resulted in an immediate correction order on December 6, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. [...]”
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 690: 144G.43 Subdivision 1 Resident record Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain records for five of five residents (R4, R5, R1, R2, R3) for whom they provided services included authentication of documentation for pool agency staff, with the
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain records for five of five residents (R4, R5, R1, R2, R3) for whom they provided services included authentication of documentation for pool agency staff, with the name and title of the person. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Assisted living facilities must maintain records for each resident for whom it is providing services. [...]”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain 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.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain 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. This deficient condition had the potential to affect all staff, residents, 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 [...]”
Show all 15
- Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b)-(f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements and failed to conduct required evacuation drills.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on a record review and interview, the licensee failed to develop a fire safety and evacuation plan with required elements and failed to conduct required evacuation drills. This had the potential to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · 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 for two of two residents (R6, R1) and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R6) who had not returned to the facility within four days.
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 for two of two residents (R6, R1) and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the emergency relocation for one of one resident (R6) who had not returned to the facility within four days. [...]”
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 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) 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 the service plan included the required content for three of five residents (R5, R1, R2,).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for three of five residents (R5, R1, R2,). [...]”
Rule cited: “(f) The service plan must include: (1) a description of the services to be provided, the fees for services, and the frequency of each service, according to the resident's current assessment and resident preferences; (2) the identification of staff or [...]”
- Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management record with the required content for two of five residents (R5, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to develop an individualized medication management record with the required content for two of five residents (R5, R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 delegated procedures were followed by two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F and ULP-D) observed during medication administration.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure delegated procedures were followed by two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F and ULP-D) observed during medication administration. [...]”
Rule cited: “When administration of medications is delegated to unlicensed personnel, the assisted living facility must ensure that the registered nurse has: (1) instructed the unlicensed personnel in the proper methods to administer the medications, and the unlicensed [...]”
- Tag 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 prescribed for one of seven residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were administered as prescribed for one of seven residents (R1) 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 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled correctly and included the expiration date of a time-dated drug, for one of one resident (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled correctly and included the expiration date of a time-dated drug, for one of one resident (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 [...]”
- Tag 2110: 144G.82 Subd. 3 Policies Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures required in assisted living facilities with dementia care were provided to each resident and/or the resident's legal and designated representative at the time of move-in for four of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure policies and procedures required in assisted living facilities with dementia care were provided to each resident and/or the resident's legal and designated representative at the time of move-in for four of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) In addition to the policies and procedures required in the licensing of all facilities, the assisted living facility with dementia care licensee must develop and implement policies and procedures that address the: (1) philosophy of how services are [...]”
- Tag 2140: 144G.83 Subd. 3 Supervising staff training Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to designate a qualified person to oversee staff training in the care of individuals with dementia.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to designate a qualified person to oversee staff training in the care of individuals with dementia. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “Persons providing or overseeing staff training must have experience and knowledge in the care of individuals with dementia, including: (1) two years of work experience related to Alzheimer's disease or other dementias, or in health care, gerontology, or [...]”
- 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 conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions, and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for four of five residents (R5, R1, R2, R3) who received services under an assisted living with dementia care license.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an individualized written activity evaluation that addressed all six provisions, and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for four of five residents (R5, R1, R2, R3) who received services under an assisted living with dementia care license. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 110 (144g.10 Subdivision 1a - Assisted Living Director License Required): $500.00
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,500.00.
- Tag 110: 144G.10 Subdivision 1a Assisted living director license required Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- February 5, 2024 · report HL303918664M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) financially exploited five residents when she diverted controlled substances including opioid pain medications.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated.”
“The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: financial exploitation substantiated (individual responsibility).
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The investigation identified a pattern of documentation indicative of drug diversion for four out of the five residents reviewed extending over a three month period.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility started an internal investigation as a result of random audits, notified the police, and terminated the AP's employment.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment.”
Survey completed January 3, 2024: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure four of five resident reviewed (R2, R3, R4 and R5) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure four of five resident reviewed (R2, R3, R4 and R5) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an indivdual person 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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
- August 4, 2022 · report HL30391003M
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 92 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 VISTA PRAIRIE AT GARNETTE GARDENS
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 426097
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2026-08-01
- Licensed capacity
- 92
- Licensee
- VISTA PRAIRIE AT GARNETTE GARDENS
- County
- Redwood County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Anna Petersmeyer
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.
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 checked7 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 |
| 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 |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard provide?
Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Redwood Falls, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 92 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard?
No. We publish state licensing details for Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard 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 Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard 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. Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard?
Visit Vista Prairie at Garnette Gard at 511 Dekalb Street, Redwood Falls, MN 56283.
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