Assisted Living and Memory Care
Woodstone Senior Living
2020 Meyer Drive, New Ulm, MN 56073 · Map
Licensed for 30 residents · WOODSTONE SENIOR LIVING
Woodstone Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in New Ulm, Minnesota. It is licensed for 30 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, 30 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 422057, current license dated Nov 1, 2025. Licensee WOODSTONE SENIOR LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
1.5 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Woodstone Senior Living this community | 30 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated | |
| Orchard Hill Senior Living | 0.1 mi | 62 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Prairie Senior Cottages of New | 0.3 mi | 20 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Vista Prairie at Ridgeway on 2 | 0.7 mi | 60 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Oak Hills Living Center Assist | 1.2 mi | 16 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
State inspection record0 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- May 7, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 0 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 1 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 0 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (May 7, 2025, state report SUC311)
MDH: “On May 5, 2025, through May 7, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider.”
Survey completed May 7, 2025: 1 correction order
- 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 medications were labeled correctly for one of two residents (R2).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were labeled correctly for one of two residents (R2). In addition, the licensee failed to ensure medications were not expired for licensee's house medication supply. This had the potential to affect all the licensee's current residents. [...]”
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 [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance; no immediate fines.
Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): No orders were issued for this inspection report.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- May 19, 2022: report XIOL11 · 16 correction orders
Details
Survey completed May 19, 2022: 16 correction orders
- 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 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C) observed to provide personal cares.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-C) observed to provide personal cares. [...]”
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 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 have a written emergency preparedness plan with all of the required content.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to have a written emergency preparedness plan with all of the required content. This had the potential to affect all 29 current 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 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, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, and failed to
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, failed to provide required employee and resident training on fire safety and evacuation, 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 910: 144G.50 Subd. 2 Contract information Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to execute a written contract with the required content for three of three residents (R1, R2, R3) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) The contract must include in a conspicuous place and manner on the contract the legal name and the license number of the facility. [...]”
Show all 16
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted supervision of unlicensed staff as required for one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted supervision of unlicensed staff as required for one of three unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 1610: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (a-b) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed an initial, comprehensive nursing assessment prior to signing the assisted living contract/providing services for one of three residents (R2) as required, with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
- Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive reassessment no more than 14 days after the initiation of services, for one of three residents (R2) as required, with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) completed a comprehensive reassessment no more than 14 days after the initiation of services, for one of three residents (R2) as required, with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(c) Resident reassessment and monitoring must be conducted no more than 14 calendar days after initiation of services. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a current written service plan was finalized no later than 14
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a current written service plan was finalized no later than 14 calendar days after the date that services were first provided, for one of three residents (R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 1650: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (f) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the service plan included the required content for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed.
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 one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
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 1700: 144G.71 Subd. 2 Provision of medication management services Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted an individualized assessment with the required content for two of three residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted an individualized assessment with the required content for two of three residents (R1, R2) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident who requests medication management services, the facility shall, prior to providing medication management services, have a registered nurse, licensed health professional, or authorized prescriber under section 151.37 conduct an [...]”
- 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 transcribed as prescribed for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure medications were transcribed as prescribed for one of three 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 1820: 144G.71 Subd. 13 Prescriptions Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure written or electronically recorded prescriptions were obtained for one of three residents (R1) with records reviewed. [...]”
Rule cited: “There must be a current written or electronically recorded prescription as defined in section 151.01, subdivision 16a, for all prescribed medications that the assisted living facility is managing for the resident.”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property for the facility. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 Appropriate care and services Level 3, widespread scope, scope/level letter I · correction period: IMMEDIATE
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for eight of eight residents (R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12) with siderails.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the care and services were provided according to acceptable health care and medical, or nursing standards for eight of eight residents (R5, R6, R7, R8, R9, R10, R11, R12) with siderails. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
- Tag 2410: 144G.91 Subd. 13 Personal and treatment privacy Level 2, pattern scope, scope/level letter E · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the right to respect and privacy for five of five residents (R13, R14, R15, R16, R17) with regards to displaying protected health information.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the right to respect and privacy for five of five residents (R13, R14, R15, R16, R17) with regards to displaying protected health information. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to consideration of their privacy, individuality, and cultural identity as related to their social, religious, and psychological well-being. [...]”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $3,000.00.
- 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
Inconclusive investigations (1)
- October 10, 2023 · report HL299134403M · MDH finding: Inconclusive
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when staff failed to follow the resident's plan of care and served food that was not a part of the resident's prescribed diet. In addition, the facility neglected the resident when the alleged perpetrator (AP), a registered nurse (RN), failed to report, assess, and monitor a change in condition. The resident was admitted to the hospital with aspiration pneumonia and died approximately two weeks later.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect inconclusive.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was inconclusive. The on-call registered nurse (RN)/alleged perpetrator (AP) failed to appropriately assess the resident's change in condition and failed to respond to reports of oxygen saturation levels below normal ranges. The resident experienced low oxygen saturation levels around 70% to 80% (normal range is 90%-100%) for almost 24 hours. Unlicensed personnel (ULP) reported abnormal oxygen saturation levels to the on-call RN, but a physician was not updated, and no action was taken. An equal opportunity employer. However, the resident's daughter requested staff to call the facility nurse later that day, who directed the resident be sent to the emergency room. The resident was hospitalized with aspiration pneumonia and a COPD exacerbation and returned to the facility on hospice services. [...]”
Action taken by facility: “The facility reported the incident to MAARC and the on-call RN was retrained. Dietary staff were also retrained on appropriate diets.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed August 22, 2023: 1 correction order
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident received health care services from people who were competent, when the facility on-call registered nurse (RN)-A failed to assess and monitor a resident's change in condition for one of one residents (R1) reviewed.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident received health care services from people who were competent, when the facility on-call registered nurse (RN)-A failed to assess and monitor a resident's change in condition for one of one residents (R1) reviewed. [...]”
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 [...]”
- Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Seven (7) 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 30 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 WOODSTONE SENIOR LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 422057
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-11-01
- Licensed capacity
- 30
- Licensee
- WOODSTONE SENIOR LIVING
- County
- Brown County
- Administrator/Authorized Agent
- Jacob Work
Source: Minnesota state licensing records (agency listing), retrieved 2026-09-09. Licensing status is a matter of public record; it is not a quality rating.
Administrator/Authorized Agent name from the Minnesota licensing record, as of Sep 9, 2026.
Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs
How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota
- Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)
Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 1.5 mi, nursing home 1.2 mi, pharmacy 1.4 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- New Ulm Medical Center, New Ulm. 1.5 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Oak Hills Living Center, New Ulm. 1.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Ecumen Home Care-Pathstone, Mankato. 25.7 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Allina Health Pharmacy- New Ulm. 1.4 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, 2.5 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. 38.1 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 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 | No plain statements of services found |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does Woodstone Senior Living provide?
Woodstone Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in New Ulm, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 30 residents.
Does Lilisity rate Woodstone Senior Living?
No. We publish state licensing details for Woodstone Senior Living 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 Woodstone Senior Living 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. Woodstone Senior Living does not publish its prices.
How do I contact Woodstone Senior Living?
Use Woodstone Senior Living's website, woodstoneseniorliving.com, or visit at 2020 Meyer Drive, 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