Walker Methodist Care Suites.
Walker Methodist Care Suites is Grade C−, ranked in the bottom 49% of Minnesota memory care with 1 MDH citation on record; last inspected Sep 2025.
A large home, reviewed on public record.
Ranked against 142 Minnesota facilities.
ALF memory care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better. Source: Minnesota Dept. of Health · Health Regulation Division.
FACILITY WATCH · BETA
Walker Methodist Care Suites has 1 citation on record. Know the moment anything changes.
New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.
Citation history, plotted month by month.
1 deficiencie on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.
Finding distribution
1 total · 36 monthsScope × Severity (CMS A–L)
Questions to ask before you visit.
A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Walker Methodist Care Suites's record and state requirements.
The most recent inspection on September 10, 2025 recorded zero deficiencies across all standards — can you walk us through the written policies and procedures that support your dementia care program, and confirm they align with Minnesota Statutes chapter 144G requirements for assisted living with dementia care?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
One complaint was filed with the Minnesota Department of Health during the inspection period on file — was that complaint substantiated, and if so, what corrective action plan did the facility implement in response?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
With 73 licensed beds and a dementia care designation under Minn. Stat. ch. 144G, how does the facility document and track individualized service plans for residents with cognitive impairment, and can families review sample documentation of how those plans are updated?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Every MDH visit, verbatim.
2 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.
2025-09-10Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
A routine licensing survey was conducted at Walker Methodist Care Suites from September 8-10, 2025, and the facility received state correction orders for violations of Minnesota statutes related to assisted living with dementia care. No fines were assessed at this time, and the facility is required to document how it corrected the violations and implemented changes to prevent future noncompliance. The facility may request reconsideration of the correction orders within 15 calendar days if it wishes to challenge them.
Full inspector notes
correction orders and document the actions taken to comply in the facility's records .The Department reserves the right to return to the facility at any time should the Department receive a complaint or deem it necessar yto ensure the health, safety, and welfare of residents in your care. STATE CORRECTIO ONRDERS The enclosed State Form documents the state correction orders. MDH documents state licensing correction orders using federal software. Tag numbers are assigned to Minnesota state statutes for Assisted Living Facilities .The assigned tag number appears in the far left column entitled "ID Prefix Tag". The state statute number and the corresponding text of the state statute out of compliance are listed in the "Summary Statement of Deficiencies "column. This column also includes the findings that are in violation of the state statute after the statement, "This MN Requiremen tis not met as evidenced by . . ." In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G3. 1 Subd .4, MDH may asses sfines based on the level and scope of the violations; however, no immediate fines are assesse dfor this survey of your facility. DOCUMENTATIO ONF ACTION TO COMPLY In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G3. 0, Subd .5(c), t he licensee must document actions taken to comply with the correction orders within the time period outlined on the state form; however, plans of correction are not required to be submitted for approval. The correction order documentation should include the following: An equal opportunity employer . Letter ID: IS7N REVISE 0D9/13/2021 Walker Methodist Care Suites October 14, 2025 Page 2 x Identify how the area(s) of noncompliance was corrected related to the resident(s)/ employee(s) identified in the correction order. x Identify how the area(s) of noncompliance was corrected for all of the provider’s resident(s)/ employees that may be affected by the noncompliance. x Identify what changes to your systems and practices were made to ensure compliance with the specific statute(s). CORRECTIO ONRDER RECONSIDERATI OPRNOCESS In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G3. 2, Subd .2, you may challenge the correction order(s) issued, including the level and scope ,and any fine assesse dthrough the correction order reconsideration process .The request for reconsideration must be in writing and received by MDH within 15 calendar days of the correction order receipt date. To submit a reconsideration request, please visit: https:/ / forms.web.health.state.mn.us/form/ HRDAppealsForm The MDH Health Regulation Division (HRD )values your feedback about your experience during the survey and/or investigation process .Please fill out this anonymous provider feedback questionnaire at your convenience at this link: https:/ / forms.office.com/g/Bm5uQEpHV.a Your input is important to us and will enable MDH to improve its processe sand communication with providers. If you have any questions regarding the questionnaire ,please contact Susan Winkelmann at susanw. inkelmann@state.mn.us or call 651-201-5952. You are encouraged to retain this document for your records. It is your responsibility to share the information contained in the letter and state form with your organizations’ Governing Body. If you have any questions ,please contact me. Sincerely, Renee L. Anderson ,Supervisor State Evaluation Team Email: ReneeL. .Anderson@state.mn.us Telephone :651-201-5871 Fax1: -866-890-9290 HHH PRINTED: 10/14/2025 FORM APPROVED STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES (X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA (X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION (X3) DATE SURVEY AND PLAN OF CORRECTION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: COMPLETED A. BUILDING: ______________________ B. WING _____________________________ 20444 09/10/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 7400 YORK AVENUE SOUTH WALKER METHODIST CARE SUITES EDINA, MN 55435 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES PROVIDER'S PLAN OF CORRECTION (X4) ID ID (X5) (EACH DEFICIENCY MUST BE PRECEDED BY FULL (EACH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHOULD BE COMPLETE PREFIX PREFIX REGULATORY OR LSC IDENTIFYING INFORMATION) CROSS-REFERENCED TO THE APPROPRIATE DATE TAG TAG DEFICIENCY) 0 000 Initial Comments 0 000 ******ATTENTION****** Minnesota Department of Health is documenting the State Licensing ASSISTED LIVING PROVIDER LICENSING Correction Orders using federal software. CORRECTION ORDER(S) Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section Living License Providers. The assigned 144G.08 to 144G.95, these correction orders are tag number appears in the far left column issued pursuant to a survey. entitled "ID Prefix Tag." The state Statute number and the corresponding text of the Determination of whether violations are corrected state Statute out of compliance is listed in requires compliance with all requirements the "Summary Statement of Deficiencies" provided at the Statute number indicated below. column. This column also includes the When Minnesota Statute contains several items, findings which are in violation of the state failure to comply with any of the items will be requirement after the statement, "This considered lack of compliance. Minnesota requirement is not met as evidenced by." Following the surveyors' INITIAL COMMENTS: findings is the Time Period for Correction. SL #20444016-0 PLEASE DISREGARD THE HEADING On September 8, 2025, through September 10, OF THE FOURTH COLUMN WHICH 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health STATES,"PROVIDER'S PLAN OF conducted a survey at the above provider, and CORRECTION." THIS APPLIES TO the following correction orders are issued. At the FEDERAL DEFICIENCIES ONLY. THIS time of the survey, there were 65 residents, all of WILL APPEAR ON EACH PAGE. whom were receiving services under the provider's Assisted Living Facility with Dementia THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO Care license. SUBMIT A PLAN OF CORRECTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF MINNESOTA STATE STATUTES. The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level pursuant to 144G.31 Subd. 1, 2 and 3. 0 480 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum 0 480 SS=F requirements; required food services (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the LABORATORY DIRECTOR'S OR PROVIDER/SUPPLIER REPRESENTATIVE'S SIGNATURE TITLE (X6) DATE STATE FORM 6899 232111 If continuation sheet 1 of 10 PRINTED: 10/14/2025 FORM APPROVED STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES (X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA (X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION (X3) DATE SURVEY AND PLAN OF CORRECTION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: COMPLETED A. BUILDING: ______________________ B. WING _____________________________ 20444 09/10/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 7400 YORK AVENUE SOUTH WALKER METHODIST CARE SUITES EDINA, MN 55435 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES PROVIDER'S PLAN OF CORRECTION (X4) ID ID (X5) (EACH DEFICIENCY MUST BE PRECEDED BY FULL (EACH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHOULD BE COMPLETE PREFIX PREFIX REGULATORY OR LSC IDENTIFYING INFORMATION) CROSS-REFERENCED TO THE APPROPRIATE DATE TAG TAG DEFICIENCY) 0 480 Continued From page 1 0 480 Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. (b) For an assisted living facility with a licensed capacity of ten or fewer residents: (1) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, part 4626.0033, item A, the facility may share a certified food protection manager (CFPM) with one other facility located within a 60-mile radius and under common management provided the CFPM is present at each facility frequently enough to effectively administer, manage, and supervise each facility's food service operation; (2) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, part 4626.0545, item A, kick plates that are not removable or cannot be rotated open are allowed unless the facility has been issued repeated correction orders for violations of Minnesota Rules, part 4626.1565 or 4626.1570; (3) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, part 4626.0685, item A, the facility is not required to provide integral drainboards, utensil racks, or tables large enough to accommodate soiled and clean items that may accumulate during hours of operation provided soiled items do not contaminate clean items, surfaces, or food, and clean equipment and dishes are air dried in a manner that prevents contamination before storage; (4) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, part 4626.1070, item A, the facility is not required to install a dedicated handwashing sink in its existing kitchen provided it designates one well of a two-compartment sink for use only as a handwashing sink; (5) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, parts 4626.1325, 4626.1335, and 4626.1360, item A, existing floor, wall, and ceiling finishes are allowed provided the facility keeps them clean and in good condition; STATE FORM 6899 232111 If continuation sheet 2 of 10 PRINTED: 10/14/2025 FORM APPROVED STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES (X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA (X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION (X3) DATE SURVEY AND PLAN OF CORRECTION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: COMPLETED A. BUILDING: ______________________ B.
2024-03-12Complaint Investigation1 · Substantiated Finding
Plain-language summary
An investigation found that a staff member neglected a resident by failing to respond to her call pendant for assistance, after which the resident fell and sustained a pelvic fracture; the resident died three weeks later from complications related to the fall. The resident, who had a history of falls and balance problems, should have received assistance to the bathroom according to her service plan, but the staff member left her unattended in the bathroom and did not respond when the pendant call remained active for nearly 50 minutes. The staff member was solely responsible for this maltreatment.
“MDH substantiated maltreatment or licensing violation finding”
Full inspector notes
Finding: Substantiated, individual responsibility Nature of Investigation: The Minnesota Department of Health investigated an allegation of maltreatment, in accordance with the Minnesota Reporting of Maltreatment of Vulnerable Adults Act, Minn. Stat. 626.557, and to evaluate compliance with applicable licensing standards for the provider type. Initial Investigation Allegation(s): The alleged perpetrator (AP) neglected the resident when the AP failed to respond to the resident’s pendant call for assistance. The resident fell on the floor and sustained a pelvic fracture and died three weeks later. Investigative Findings and Conclusion: The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP failed to respond to the resident’s call pendant and the resident self-ambulated and fell when walking back from the bathroom. The resident was diagnosed with a pelvic fracture. The investigator conducted interviews with facility staff members, including administrative staff, nursing staff, unlicensed staff, and family members of the resident. The investigation included review of the resident record, death record, facility internal investigation, facility incident report, personnel files, staff schedules, and related facility policies and procedures. Also, the investigator observed staff providing care to residents. The resident resided in an assisted living facility. The resident’s diagnoses included history of spine fractures related to frailty of aging and weakness. The resident’s service agreement indicated she received toileting assistance of one person and staff were to assist the resident to the toilet, physically assist the resident to use the toilet, and change undergarments and provide transfer assistance and cleaning private areas as needed. The resident’s service plan included assistance with orientation and confusion, escorts with physical assistance or standby assistance to meals, pendant use reminders, safety checks related to fall risk, and taking the resident to the bathroom during scheduled toileting services. The resident’s assessment indicated the resident needed to use a walker, had balance problems when walking, and had “some difficulty” using the call light system. The facility investigation indicated staff found the resident lying on the bedroom floor with her walker near-by. The resident stated no one came to help her after she pressed her pendant call button and she walked on her own to use the bathroom and lost her balance and fell when she walked back to bed. Documentation indicated the resident had a safety check due approximately two hours prior to staff finding the resident on the floor, however, the safety check was not documented as complete by the AP until after the time of the fall. The investigation indicated the AP stated she did not think about calling another staff member for help when she had two residents who both needed assistance at the same time. A handwritten statement from the nurse working during the time of the incident indicated the nurse attempted to contact the AP multiple times to let her know the resident’s pendant call was active and not reset. When the nurse was on the way to the floor where the resident resided, the AP contacted the nurse via walkie-talkie and stated she found the resident lying on the floor. When the nurse questioned the AP why she did not answer her walkie-talkie when the nurse tried to call, the AP indicated her walkie-talkie was not working. The nurse then asked the AP how she was able to call him via walkie-talkie to notify him of the resident’s fall and the AP did not respond to the question. Review of handwritten statement from the AP indicated she was working with another resident when she noticed a light on in the resident’s room. The AP indicated, approximately 45 minutes before the resident’s pendant call was reset, she found the resident in the bathroom and told the resident to wait for her to return. The AP indicated she left the resident alone in the bathroom, “because she was okay.” Progress notes from the day of the incident indicated the resident complained of right upper buttock pain after the fall. Approximately six hours after the resident was found on the floor, emergency medical services took the resident to the hospital due to increased pain, elevated blood pressure, vomiting, and the resident stating, “I can’t walk, I fell today.” The resident returned to the facility two days later diagnosed with pelvic fractures, referral for hospice, and prescription for oxycodone (a narcotic pain medication). Review of staffing records indicated the AP was the resident’s assigned caregiver during the time of the incident. The resident’s pendant call report indicated during the time of the incident, the resident’s pendant call was not reset for 49 minutes and 57 seconds. Review of the resident’s death record indicated complications of decreased mobility related to a fall that caused right pelvis fractures three weeks prior contributed to the resident’s death. The AP’s employee file indicated the AP began employment at the facility approximately 14 months prior to the incident. The facility educated the AP regarding resident rights, falls prevention, standby assistance techniques, safe transfers and ambulation, incontinence assistance, and use of pagers and walkie-talkies. The AP met performance expectations for providing activities of daily living, personal care to residents, and using electronic devices including the walkie-talkie. During interview, the AP stated she had a busy shift the day of the incident and was assisting another resident often during the shift. The AP stated the resident used her pendant call button and she helped the resident to the toilet and then left to assist another resident. The AP stated she heard a “boom” from the resident’s apartment and walked in to find the resident on the floor of her room. The AP contacted the nurse and the AP and the nurse assisted the resident back to bed. The AP stated she approached another co-worker for assistance during the shift, but the co-worker was busy. The AP did not use her walkie-talkie to contact other staff members for assistance with residents when there were competing needs. The AP stated she did not reset the resident’s pendant, which created a beeping sound and notification to her pager, because she did not know how to reset it. During interview, multiple staff stated they would not leave the resident alone in the bathroom and would stay in the bathroom or within proximity to the resident until she was finished in the bathroom to ensure the resident’s safety. The staff also stated they would contact other staff for assistance if they needed assistance with residents. During interview, an unlicensed staff stated to reset a pendant call and stop pager notifications, staff need to physically see the resident to reset the button on the pendant and staff are directed to respond to a pendant call within five to seven minutes. The staff stated if an assigned staff cannot assist a resident in a timely manner, then the assigned staff member needs to call another staff person via walkie-talkie for assistance. During interview, the resident’s family member stated the resident reported staff did not come in to change her incontinent brief at the usual time and she was afraid of urine leaking on her bed. The resident indicated when no one responded to the pendant call, she went to the bathroom alone. After the fall, the resident experienced a lot of pain and needed to be in a wheelchair. In conclusion, the Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. Substantiated: Minnesota Statutes, section 626.5572, Subdivision 19. “Substantiated” means a preponderance of evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred. Neglect: Minnesota Statutes, section 626.5572, subdivision 17 “Neglect” means neglect by a caregiver or self-neglect. (a) "Caregiver neglect" means the failure or omission by a caregiver to supply a vulnerable adult with care or services, including but not limited to, food, clothing, shelter, health care, or supervision which is: (1) reasonable and necessary to obtain or maintain the vulnerable adult's physical or mental health or safety, considering the physical and mental capacity or dysfunction of the vulnerable adult; and (2) which is not the result of an accident or therapeutic conduct. Vulnerable Adult interviewed: No, vulnerable adult is deceased. Family/Responsible Party interviewed: Yes. Alleged Perpetrator interviewed: Yes. Action taken by facility: The facility implemented an additional process to monitor call lights. The AP is no longer employed at the facility.
1 older inspection from 2023 are not shown in the free view.
1 older inspection (2023–2023) are available with a premium membership.
Other facilities in Hennepin County.
Other memory care facilities in Hennepin County with similar care offerings.
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
No published reviews yet. Use the button above to share your experience.
Other memory care options nearby.
More options in neighboring cities
Licensed memory care in other cities within this county region — useful when your search radius crosses city limits.