Assisted Living and Memory Care
York Gardens Senior Living
3451 Parklawn Avenue, Edina, MN 55435 · Map
Licensed for 94 residents · YORK GARDENS SENIOR LIVING
York Gardens Senior Living is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Edina, Minnesota. It is licensed for 94 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.
Prices
This community does not publish its prices.
Area costs
Care and services
From the community’s website
What York Gardens Senior Living says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.
- Has a separate memory care unit, wing or neighborhood.
This familiarity will help if/when the participant requires more care and the family decides to seek full time assistance in our secure memory care neighborhood.
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Nurse on site: on call 24 hours a day.
RN onsite 40 hours/week and on call 24 hours/day
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Offers hospice care on site or works with hospice providers.
We offer senior housing options for Independence Plus, Assisted Living, Memory Care and Enhanced Care as well as coordination of hospice and other care services.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Provides transportation.
York Gardens has a bus that is used for activities and transportation for our residents.
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - 3 meals a day.
Three family-style meals per day
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026) - Pets allowed.
Yes, you are welcome to bring your pet with you!
(page, checked Oct 12, 2026) - Couples welcome.
at York Gardens is designed for couples who live together in the same apartment, but who have differing care needs.
(page, checked Oct 15, 2026)
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, 94 residents
Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 423593, current license dated Dec 1, 2025. Licensee YORK GARDENS SENIOR LIVING.
Nearest emergency room
1.3 miles
M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| York Gardens Senior Living this community | 94 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated | |
| Walker Methodist Care Suites | 0.1 mi | 73 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Sisters Home Health Care | 0.3 mi | 5 | Not published | Active | 0 substantiated |
| Yorkshire of Edina Senior Living | 0.4 mi | 110 | Not published | Active | 1 substantiated |
| Sunrise of Edina | 0.5 mi | 99 | $3,000/mo | Active | 3 substantiated |
State inspection record1 substantiated
- Last evaluation
- May 7, 2025
- Evaluations on record
- 2
- Investigations substantiated
- 1 kept 7 years
- Inconclusive
- 0 kept 4 years
- Unsubstantiated
- 2 kept 3 years
Most recent evaluation (May 7, 2025, state report H1K611)
MDH: “On May 5, 2025, through May 7, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider, and the following correction orders are issued.”
Survey completed May 7, 2025: 3 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
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death), and is issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an effective infection control program to comply with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. The licensee failed to ensure proper cleaning of shared medical equipment for three of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, ULP-E, ULP-H), and ensure direct care staff appropriately gloved and performed adequate hand hygiene, for two of four employees (ULP-D, ULP-G). [...]”
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 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 employees received at least eight (8) hours of annual training including required content, for each 12 months of employment for one of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-C).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure employees received at least eight (8) hours of annual training including required content, for each 12 months of employment for one of three employees (registered nurse (RN)-C). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
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 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
Earlier evaluations (1)
- July 12, 2023: report CZMP11 · 10 correction orders
Details
Survey completed July 14, 2023: 10 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: (B) food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626; and”
- Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical and nursing standards for infection control. The deficient practice had the potential to affect residents, employees, and visitors. [...]”
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 700: 144G.43 Subdivision 1 Resident record Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview the licensee failed to ensure resident's personal health and medical information was kept private. This had the potential to affect all sixty-five (65) residents residing in the facility receiving services. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Resident records, whether written or electronic, must be protected against loss, tampering, or unauthorized disclosure in compliance with chapter 13 and other applicable relevant federal and state laws. [...]”
- Tag 780: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (1) 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 provide smoke alarms that are interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to provide smoke alarms that are interconnected so that the actuation of one alarm causes all alarms in the dwelling unit to actuate. This deficient condition had the ability to affect all staff and residents. [...]”
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 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 in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents and staff. [...]”
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 10
- Tag 970: 144G.50 Subd. 5 Waivers of liability prohibited Level 1, widespread scope, scope/level letter C · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident handbook did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident handbook did not include language waiving the licensee's liability for health, safety, or personal property of a resident. This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “The contract must not include a waiver of facility liability for the health and safety or personal property of a resident. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
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 to the resident, legal representative, or designated representative, and the Office of Long-Term Care (OOLTC) for one of one resident (R2) who had an emergency relocation. [...]”
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 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 resident or resident representative to document agreement on the services to be provided for three of six residents (R3, R7, R8).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the current service plan included a signature or other authentication by resident or resident representative to document agreement on the services to be provided for three of six residents (R3, R7, R8). [...]”
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 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review the licensee failed to ensure all medications were securely locked in substantially constructed compartments and permitted only authorized personnel to have access for three of five residents (R6, R7, R8). [...]”
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 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
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 [...]”
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 510 (144g.41 Subd. 3 - Infection Control Program): $500.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $500.00.
- 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
Substantiated investigations (state reports)
- November 1, 2022 · report HL307791202M · MDH finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility
Details
Allegation, as written: “The alleged perpetrated (AP) financially exploited five residents when the AP stole $360 from resident #1, $20 from resident#2, $125 from resident #3, $50 from resident #4 and $300 from resident #5.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated.”
“The alleged perpetrator (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 alleged perpetrator (AP) was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP, who worked at the facility through a staffing agency, entered the residents' rooms and stole money. An equal opportunity employer. The facility started an internal investigation and did not allow agency staff to be back in the building.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility called the police and started an internal investigation. The ED called the agency and requested the AP is no longer allowed to enter the building.”
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 September 28, 2022: 1 correction order
- Tag 2360: 144G.91 Subd. 8 Freedom from maltreatment
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure five of five residents reviewed (R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5) was free from maltreatment.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interviews, and document review, the facility failed to ensure five of five residents reviewed (R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5) was free from maltreatment. All five residents were financial exploited. Findings include: The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) issued a determination that financial exploitation occurred, and that an individual staff person was responsible for the maltreatment, in connection with incidents which occurred at the facility.”
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
Unsubstantiated investigations (2)
- May 9, 2025 · report HL307791340M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident by failing to refill and administer his mental health medications. As a result, the resident missed 11 days of medication and was subsequently hospitalized following a fall.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. Upon admission, the resident was prescribed donepezil and sertraline. At the time, the medications were not eligible for refill through the facility's pharmacy. A family member informed staff that she had both medications at home and would administer them daily until a refill could be processed. A review of the documentation and family member interview confirmed the resident did not miss any doses during this period.”
Action taken by facility: “No action required.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time.”
Survey completed April 24, 2025: no correction orders issued.
- December 23, 2024 · report HL307795425M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident #1 when a medication error and the facility administered medications prescribed for resident #2. Resident #1 experienced a drop in blood pressure and was sent to the emergency room.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. While a medication error did occur, the unlicensed caregivers involved promptly informed the facility nurse. The facility provided appropriate care and monitoring following the error including sending him to the emergency room later the same day.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility investigated the incident and sent resident #1 to the hospital. The facility provided re-education and/or corrective action to the unlicensed caregivers to prevent a similar medication error from recurring.”
Action taken by MDH: “No further action taken at this time. CC: The Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care The Office of Ombudsman for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities”
Survey completed November 5, 2024: no correction orders issued.
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”
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 94 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 YORK GARDENS SENIOR LIVING
- License type
- Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
- License number
- 423593
- License status
- Active
- Current license dated
- 2025-12-01
- Licensed capacity
- 94
- Licensee
- YORK GARDENS SENIOR LIVING
- County
- Hennepin County
- Executive Director
- Katie Rose
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 Oct 12, 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.
Staff pay and workplace safety1 federal wage case, no violations found
Federal records about how the employer here treats its staff.
Federal wage and hour cases
The Department of Labor checks that staff are paid minimum wage and overtime as the law requires.
DOL also concluded 1 case here with no violations found, most recently for a period ending Oct 24, 2012.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division enforcement data, loaded Oct 15, 2026. Concluded cases only. The dates are the period in which DOL found violations, not when the case opened or closed. Back wages are what the employer agreed to pay; penalties are what DOL assessed. DOL does not publish a page for each case, so search the dataset by case number.
Location and nearby careNearest hospital 1.3 mi, nursing home 1.2 mi, pharmacy 0.6 mi
- Nearest hospital with an emergency room
- M Health Fairview Southdale Hospital, Edina. 1.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
- Nearest Medicare nursing home
- Aurora On France, Edina. 1.2 miles away, straight line.
- Nearest home health agency office
- Almost Family, Edina. 1.5 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
- Nearest pharmacy
- Walgreens. 0.6 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
- Area
- USDA classes ZIP code 55435 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
- Dialysis within 15 miles
- Fmc - Southtown Dialysis, Bloomington, 0.6 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Davita Richfield Dialysis, Richfield, 2.1 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars)
Davita Bloomington Dialysis Unit Of Trc, Bloomington, 2.2 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 4 of 5 stars) - Hospice
- 23 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55435.
Caretenders Hospice, office in Minneapolis, 1.9 miles away, straight line
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, office in Saint Louis Park, 4.6 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 4 of 5 stars)
Healthpartners Hospice And Palliatice Care, office in Bloomington, 4.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars) - Nearest geriatric medicine practice
- Hennepin Healthcare System Inc, Richfield. 2.0 miles away, straight line. 1 geriatric medicine doctor listed there.
Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.
Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively moderate; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas
Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.
- Flood zone
- 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 moderate. By hazard: inland flooding relatively moderate, tornado very high, heat wave relatively high, 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 | See above |
| 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: no FEMA wildfire rating of moderate or higher here |
| FEMA National Risk Index | See above | |
| CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies | See above | |
| HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted | Jul 6, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory) | Sep 20, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Hospice - General Information | Aug 19, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| CMS Home Health Care Agencies | May 27, 2026 | Nothing on record |
| The community’s own website | See above |
Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask
What type of care does York Gardens Senior Living provide?
York Gardens Senior Living is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Edina, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 94 residents.
Does Lilisity rate York Gardens Senior Living?
No. We publish state licensing details for York Gardens 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 York Gardens Senior Living cost?
Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. York Gardens Senior Living does not publish its prices.
How do I contact York Gardens Senior Living?
Use York Gardens Senior Living's website, yorkgardens.org, or visit at 3451 Parklawn Avenue, Edina, MN 55435.
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