Whittier Place

Last evaluation

July 22, 2026

Evaluations on record

2

Investigations substantiated

3 kept 7 years

Inconclusive

1 kept 4 years

Unsubstantiated

1 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (July 22, 2026, state report 5YYQ11)

MDH: “On July 20, 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: 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 was 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 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 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) Fire protection and physical environment 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 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: “(a) Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and: (1) for dwellings or sleeping units, as defined in the State Fire Code: (i) provide smoke alarms in each room used for sleeping purposes; (ii) [...]”

• Tag 790: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (2-3) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Two (2) 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: “(2) install and maintain portable fire extinguishers in accordance with the State Fire Code; (3) install portable fire extinguishers having a minimum 2-A:10-B:C rating within Group R-3 occupancies, as defined by the State Fire Code, located so that the travel [...]”

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 780 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.

Substantiated investigations (state reports)

• May 16, 2024 · report HL308209545M · MDH finding: Substantiated, facility responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected to provide supervision to the resident who had a history of using illegal drugs. The facility found the resident deceased in her room from a drug overdose.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated.”

  “The facility was responsible for the maltreatment.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect substantiated (facility responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. The facility was aware of the residents' unsafe behaviors, history of drug use, and prior drug overdoses. The facility failed to ensure interventions were developed and/or implemented to ensure the residents safety. The resident was missing for approximately 32 hours when staff unlocked the resident's room to look for the resident. The resident was laying on the floor, deceased. The residents cause of death was a fentanyl (narcotic pain medication) and methamphetamine (a narcotic stimulant) overdose. An equal opportunity employer.”

  Action taken by facility: “The facility filed a report with the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed April 17, 2024: 1 correction order

  • Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and the facility was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details. No plan of correction is required for this tag.”

    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.”

• March 31, 2023 · report HL308205167M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The Alleged Perpetrator (AP), a facility staff, abused a resident when the AP had sex with the resident on several occasions.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”

  “The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (individual responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP engaged in sexual contact with a resident. The AP was provided training on maltreatment of vulnerable adults, ethical conduct, and appropriate boundaries. The training identified the facility did not permit any romantic or sexual involvement between a staff member and a resident.”

  Action taken by facility: “The AP no longer works at the facility.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The facility was issued a correction order regarding the vulnerable adult's right to be free from maltreatment. The responsible party will be notified of their right to appeal the maltreatment finding. [...]”

  Survey completed March 21, 2023: 1 correction order

  • Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one resident(s) reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and an individual 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.”

• January 17, 2023 · report HL308203623M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
  Details

  Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrator (AP) abused a resident when the AP coerced and then forced a resident to engage in sexual acts, under threat of violence.”

  “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated.”

  “The AP was responsible for the maltreatment.”

  Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: abuse substantiated (individual responsibility).

  MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined abuse was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP sought out the resident outside of work, coerced her to engage in sexual acts, and then threatened harm if she told anyone. The investigation identified evidence which corroborated the resident's account of events.”

  Action taken by facility: “The AP no longer works at the facility.”

  Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”

  Survey completed December 8, 2022: 4 correction orders

  • Tag 620: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (a) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews and document reviews, the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment. Police informed unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G that R1 reported a rape and they were taking R1 to the hospital. ULP-G did not make a report to MAARC but called assistant director (AD)-H. AD-H did not file a MAARC report but called the facility director (D)-C. [...]”

    Rule cited: “144G.42 Subd. 6. Compliance with requirements for reporting maltreatment of vulnerable adults; abuse prevention plan. (a) The assisted living facility must comply with the requirements for the reporting of maltreatment of vulnerable adults in section 626.557. [...]”

  • Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to complete a background study for one of one staff unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I, reviewed for alleged maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews and document review, the licensee failed to complete a background study for one of one staff unlicensed personnel (ULP)-I, reviewed for alleged maltreatment. ULP-I provided independent direct services to residents including one to one off-site activities. This had the potential to affect all 16 residents receiving services from the licensee. [...]”

    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 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure one of one residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “The facility failed to ensure one of one residents reviewed (R1) was free from maltreatment. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination maltreatment occurred, and that an individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility. Please refer to the public maltreatment report for details. No plan of correction is required for this tag.”

    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 3000: 626.557 Subd. 3 Timing of report Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: Seven (7) days
    Details

    Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment.

    MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews and document reviews, the licensee failed to immediately report to the Minnesota Adult Abuse Reporting Center (MAARC) suspected maltreatment of one of one residents (R1) reviewed for maltreatment. Police informed unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G that R1 reported a rape, and they were taking R1 to the hospital. ULP-G did not make a report to MAARC but called assistant director (AD)-H. AD-H did not file a MAARC report but called the facility director (D)-C. [...]”

    Rule cited: “(a) A mandated reporter who has reason to believe that a vulnerable adult is being or has been maltreated, or who has knowledge that a vulnerable adult has sustained a physical injury which is not reasonably explained shall immediately report the information [...]”

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.

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 86 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.