Assisted Living and Memory Care
Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2
720 23rd Street North, New Ulm, MN 56073 · Map
Licensed for 60 residents · VISTA PRAIRIE AT RIDGEWAY ON 23RD
Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in New Ulm, Minnesota. It is licensed for 60 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, 60 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422384, current license dated Oct 1, 2025. Licensee VISTA PRAIRIE AT RIDGEWAY ON 23RD.
Nearest emergency room
2.0 miles
New Ulm Medical Center, rated 5 of 5 stars by CMS.
Side by side with nearby communities
The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.
| Community | Distance | Licensed capacity | Published starting price | License | Inspection citations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 this community | 60 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Orchard Hill Senior Living | 0.6 mi | 62 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Woodstone Senior Living | 0.7 mi | 30 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Prairie Senior Cottages of New | 0.9 mi | 20 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Oak Hills Living Center Assist | 1.8 mi | 16 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- July 22, 2026
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (July 22, 2026, state report 86X811)
MDH: “On July 21, 2026, through July 22, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed July 22, 2026: 14 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 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 maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of TB screening for active symptoms of TB for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a tuberculosis (TB) prevention program, based on the most current guidelines issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which included completion of TB screening for active symptoms of TB for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (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 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 ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 1, isolated scope, scope/level letter A · correction period: . Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 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 · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Show all 14
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) completed all required annual training topics for each 12 months of employment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D) completed all required annual training topics for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1530: 144G.64 (a) (1-2) Training in Dementia, Mental Illness, and De- Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required one hour of annual training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for one of one (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required one hour of annual training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for one of one (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must meet the following dementia care, mental illness, and de-escalation training requirements: (1) supervisors of direct-care staff must have at least eight hours of initial training on dementia topics specified under [...]”
- Tag 1750: 144G.71 Subd. 7 Delegation of medication administration Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the registered nurse (RN) failed to specify in writing, specific instructions for one of ten residents (R6) related to 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 E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to administer medications according to prescriber orders for six of eleven residents (R2, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to administer medications according to prescriber orders for six of eleven residents (R2, R5, R6, R7, R8, R9). [...]”
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 not expired and failed to ensure medications were maintained bearing the original prescription label for one of one resident (R10) with medications reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were not expired and failed to ensure medications were maintained bearing the original prescription label for one of one resident (R10) with medications 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 1910: 144G.71 Subd. 22 Disposition of medications Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to complete in the resident's record the disposition of medications, including the medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, to whom the medications were given, date of disposition, and names of staff and other individuals involved in
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to complete in the resident's record the disposition of medications, including the medication's name, strength, prescription number as applicable, quantity, to whom the medications were given, date of disposition, and names of staff and other individuals involved in the disposition for one of one discharged resident (R1). [...]”
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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to include on the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services provided for two of two residents (R2, R4) receiving treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to include on the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services provided for two of two residents (R2, R4) receiving treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the license failed to ensure documentation that treatments were completed as instructed for one of two residents (R2) who had an ordered treatment. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”
- Tag 2240: 144G.90 Subdivision 1 Assisted living bill of rights; notification Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the current Minnesota Bill of Rights for Assisted Living Residents was provided and a written acknowledgement was received for three of three residents (R2, R3, R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the current Minnesota Bill of Rights for Assisted Living Residents was provided and a written acknowledgement was received for three of three residents (R2, R3, R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) An assisted living facility must provide the resident a written notice of the rights under section 144G.91 before the initiation of services to that resident. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 810 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (b-F) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- April 17, 2024: report QCDL11 · 16 correction orders
Details
Survey completed April 17, 2024: 16 correction orders
- 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 completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
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 completion of a two-step TST (tuberculin skin test) or other evidence of TB screening such as a blood test for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
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 maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z and failed to post the emergency preparedness plan.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to maintain a written emergency preparedness plan (EPP) with all the required content as defined in Appendix Z and failed to post the emergency preparedness plan. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The facility must meet the following requirements: (1) have a written emergency disaster plan that contains a plan for evacuation, addresses elements of sheltering in place, identifies temporary relocation sites, and details staff assignments in the event [...]”
- Tag 950: 144G.50 Subd. 3 Designation of representative Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for all of the licensee's residents.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the licensee provided the required notice for right to a designated representative with the required verbiage on a document separate from the contract for all of the licensee's residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Before or at the time of execution of an assisted living contract, an assisted living facility must offer the resident the opportunity to identify a designated representative in writing in the contract and must provide the following verbatim notice on a [...]”
- 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, to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative, for an 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, to the resident, legal representative, and designated representative, for an emergency relocation for one of one resident (R1). In addition, the licensee failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care of the relocation within four days as required. [...]”
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 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 one of one contracted unlicensed personnel (ULP-G) was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 to provide direct cares without supervision.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one contracted unlicensed personnel (ULP-G) was current and eligible on NETStudy 2.0 to provide direct cares without supervision. This resulted in an immediate correction order on April 17, 2024. [...]”
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. [...]”
Show all 16
- 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 one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) 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 one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) 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) [...]”
- 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 one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) 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 one of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) 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 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated nursing or therapy tasks within 30 days of first providing those services for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-E and ULP-F).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated nursing or therapy tasks within 30 days of first providing those services for two of two unlicensed personnel (ULP-E and ULP-F). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the current service plan included a signature or other authentication by the resident or resident's designated representative and the facility to document agreement on the services to be provided for four of four residents (R2, R3, R5, R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the current service plan included a signature or other authentication by the resident or resident's designated representative and the facility to document agreement on the services to be provided for four of four residents (R2, R3, R5, R6). [...]”
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 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-G) was determined competent by a registered nurse (RN) to administer medications.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-G) was determined competent by a registered nurse (RN) to administer medications. This had the potential to affect all residents receiving medication administration and resulted in an immediate correction order on April 17, 2024. [...]”
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 administer medications according to provider orders for one of four residents (R6).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to administer medications according to provider orders for one of four residents (R6). 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 [...]”
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, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7)
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure medications had a pharmacy label and expired medications were removed from use in two of two medication carts (MC1 and MC2)
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications had a pharmacy label and expired medications were removed from use in two of two medication carts (MC1 and MC2) 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 pattern scope (when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited [...]”
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 1940: 144G.72 Subd. 3 Individualized treatment or therapy managemen Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure it developed an individual treatment management plan to include all required content for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “For each resident receiving management of ordered or prescribed treatments or therapy services, the assisted living facility must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the treatment or therapy services that will be provided to the [...]”
- Tag 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-F) completed training and competency evaluations for orthotic braces prior to performing the treatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure one of one unlicensed personnel (ULP-F) completed training and competency evaluations for orthotic braces prior to performing the treatment. [...]”
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 1960: 144G.72 Subd. 5 Documentation of administration of treatments Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure treatment services were documented in the record for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure treatment services were documented in the record for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each treatment or therapy administered by an assisted living facility must be in the resident record. [...]”
- 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 a written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber was obtained for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber was obtained for one of two residents (R3) who received treatments. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be an up-to-date written or electronically recorded order from an authorized prescriber for all treatments and therapies. [...]”
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
- Tag 1750 (144g.71 Subd. 7 - Delegation Of Medication Administration): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,000.00.
- Tag 660: 144G.42 Subd. 9 Tuberculosis prevention and control Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
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 60 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 RIDGEWAY ON 23RD
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422384
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-10-01
- Licensed capacity
- 60
- Licensee
- VISTA PRAIRIE AT RIDGEWAY ON 23RD
- County
- Brown County
- Executive Director
- Lacie Lampman
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.
Executive Director name from public records we reviewed, as of Jan 15, 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 2.0 mi, nursing home 1.7 mi, pharmacy 1.9 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- New Ulm Medical Center, New Ulm. 2.0 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Oak Hills Living Center, New Ulm. 1.7 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Ecumen Home Care-Pathstone, Mankato. 25.9 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 1.9 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 56073 as micropolitan (micropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Davita New Ulm Dialysis, New Ulm, 3.0 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
- Hospice
- 9 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 56073.
- Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Hutchinson Health, Hutchinson. 37.5 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 high; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
- FEMA National Risk Index
- Overall: relatively high. By hazard: inland flooding relatively high, wildfire relatively low, tornado very high, heat wave relatively moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)
A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.
Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record
Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.
- The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
- What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
- How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
- What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
- How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
- How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
- What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
- What fees are charged at move-in?
- How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
- How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?
What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates
Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.
| Source | Data as of | What we found |
|---|---|---|
| Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records | Sep 28, 2026 | See above |
| U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016 | Oct 15, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| FEMA flood map | See above | |
| USDA wildfire risk | Apr 15, 2026 | Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here relatively low |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | Could not read the site |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 provide?
Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in New Ulm, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 60 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2?
No. We publish state licensing details for Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 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 Ridgeway on 2 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 Ridgeway on 2 does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2?
Use Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2's website, ridgewaynewulm.com, or visit at 720 23rd Street North, New Ulm, MN 56073.
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