Progressive Care Llc.
Progressive Care Llc is Grade C, ranked in the top 47% of Minnesota memory care with 1 MDH citation on record; last inspected Oct 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
Progressive Care Llc 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 Progressive Care Llc's record and state requirements.
The facility holds an Assisted Living Facility with Dementia Care license under Minnesota Statute chapter 144G with 87 licensed beds — can you walk us through the written dementia care program and explain how it differs from the general assisted living services?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
Minnesota Department of Health records show 1 complaint on file — can you share what that complaint involved, whether it was substantiated, and what corrective actions the facility documented in response?
Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.
The most recent inspection on October 15, 2025 resulted in zero deficiencies — can you provide a copy of that inspection report and explain how the facility prepares staff for MDH surveys?
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.
2026-01-23Complaint Investigation1 · Substantiated Finding
Plain-language summary
A complaint investigation substantiated that a staff member financially exploited a resident by diverting 17 doses of oxycodone (a controlled pain medication) that were documented as given to the resident but were not needed or used—the staff member was the only one administering these doses and did so even when assigned to other units, and records showed no actual pain or medical need for the medication. The facility had control procedures in place requiring two-staff verification of controlled medications, but the investigation found poor compliance with these safeguards and unlimited staff access to the medication storage. Licensing orders were issued to the facility.
“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) financially exploited the resident when the AP diverted 17 as needed (PRN) oxycodone (a schedule II-controlled pain medication). Investigative Findings and Conclusion: The Minnesota Department of Health determined financial exploitation was substantiated. The AP was responsible for the maltreatment. The AP repeatedly left assigned duties in a different unit to administer the resident’s scheduled and PRN oxycodone and was the only staff to document giving the resident 17 doses of PRN oxycodone. The resident and staff denied the resident had unrelieved pain or need for the PRN. The resident record showed no utilization of the PRN prior to or following the incident. The investigator conducted interviews with facility staff members, including administrative staff, nursing staff, and unlicensed staff. The investigator contacted law enforcement and the resident’s family member. The investigation included review of the resident record, controlled substance logs, pharmacy records, facility internal investigation, personnel files, staff schedules, law enforcement report, and related facility policy and procedures. Also, the investigator observed resident’s and staff at the facility and controlled drug medication storage. The resident resided in an assisted living facility secured memory care unit with diagnoses including Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's dementia without behavioral disturbances, and low back pain. The resident’s assessment and plan of care indicated the resident had severe cognitive impairment and was at risk for abuse due to cognitive deficits. The assessment and plan of care indicated the resident received medication management and administration services. The plan of care directed all controlled medication would be counted by two staff at shift change, and all controlled medications would be double locked and signed out by two staff when given. Staff would notify the registered nurse (RN) of any concerns of diversion of medication. The resident’s medication administration record (MAR) included orders for oxycodone 5 milligram (mg) tablets, with instructions to give the medication scheduled twice daily and every six hours as needed (PRN). During an onsite observation of the facility memory care unit storage, staff accessed the memory care medication storage closet using a master key, once inside the closet the keys to the narcotic lock box were laying on a shelf. As result, all staff working had unlimited access to the resident’s oxycodone medication. The resident’s counting and tracking log used to ensure accountability of the resident’s oxycodone indicated poor compliance of two staff completing a change of shift count on controlled medications and having a second staff witness the administration of the controlled substance. Licensing orders were issued to the facility. Facility internal investigation documentation indicated several staff reported the AP had conduct concerning for drug diversion including; being the only staff to administer 17 PRN oxycodone to the resident, asking staff to alter the resident’s oxycodone count documentation to be correct when a discrepancy occurred, asking staff to document the administration of PRN and scheduled oxycodone to the resident under another staff’s log in, and repeatedly insisting on providing cares and medication administration services for the resident when another staff, not the AP, was assigned to the resident. The resident’s MAR and controlled drug counting and tracking log for the resident’s oxycodone indicated the AP was the only staff to administer the PRN pain medication to the resident 17 times over seven weeks. The MAR showed the resident had not used the oxycodone prior to when the AP started administering it and had no utilization or need for the PRN following the AP’s allegation of diversion and suspension. The resident’s progress notes failed to indicate the resident was having signs, symptoms, or reports of unrelieved pain to show an indication or need to administer her PRN oxycodone at the time the AP documented giving the PRN pain medication. The resident’s pain assessment following the incident indicated the resident denied having pain. A review of the AP’s scheduled assignments and time clock punches in comparison to the residents MAR indicated the AP had documented administering scheduled and PRN oxycodone to the resident a total of 28 times when the AP was assigned as a float or to other resident group/wing (not assigned to pass medications to the resident). At these times, another staff, not the AP, was assigned to provide cares and medication administration services to the resident. At times, the AP would arrive early to her shift, document administering oxycodone to the resident and at times document administering oxycodone just before leaving her shift. The AP’s schedule indicated she was not assigned to administer medications to the resident. Even though staff identified the AP’s conduct was odd and concerning for diversion that continued for months there was no indication any of them reported their concerns to facility leadership. During an interview, facility leadership stated the resident was the only one in the facility prescribed scheduled and PRN oxycodone pain medication. Leadership stated when staff reported their concerns, they investigated the incident, but the AP avoided answering questions and denied the allegation. Facility leadership stated the AP had administered PRN oxycodone to the resident prior to clocking into her assigned shift, left her assigned duties when working as a float on an assisted living group, or on the other memory care group to provide cares and medication administration to the resident. The conduct was unusual and inappropriate. Leadership stated staff should remain on their group assigned and do all cares and medications for those residents. Leadership stated a float did meals laundry and assisted as needed but did not generally provide any medication administration unless specifically asked to do so by the staff assigned. Leadership stated one staff reported they asked to go with when the AP administered PRN oxycodone to the resident, but the AP refused. Leadership stated the resident did not have any PRN oxycodone utilization prior to the incident, and no other staff had ever reported the resident had unrelieved pain or need for the PRN other than the AP. Leadership stated the AP was the only staff to ever give the resident PRN oxycodone 17 times. Leadership stated a pain assessment for the resident was conducted following the incident which failed to indicate the resident had unrelieved pain or need for the PRN. Leadership stated the resident had not utilized any PRN Oxycodone since the AP was suspended and her employment terminated (over 2 months following the incident). Unlicensed personnel (ULP)#1 stated the resident never had signs symptoms or complaints of unrelieved pain, and indicated it was alarming the AP had given the resident oxycodone PRN and was the only one to ever give it. ULP#1 stated the AP would leave her assignment on another wing/group and go over to the memory care to do cares and administer medications to the resident. ULP#1 stated no other staff did that. ULP#1 stated there were times at work when the AP appeared to be under the influence of something. ULP#1 stated the AP’s conduct and PRN administration patterns went on for months before they were reported to leadership. ULP#2 stated the AP had strange behavior towards the resident and would say "that's my girl, no one takes care of the resident like me." ULP#2 stated the AP would leave her assigned duties and residents on another unit and go to the memory care unit specifically to give the resident’s medications and do her cares which was very unusual conduct. ULP#2 indicated it was not appropriate for the AP to leave her assigned group of residents to go to another wing/unit to pass medication for a specific resident and indicated no other staff ever did that. ULP#2 stated the resident never complained of unrelieved pain or needed PRN Oxycodone. ULP#3 stated when staff work as a float, they do not administer medications unless specifically asked to do so by the staff assigned and indicated that was not a common practice. ULP#3 stated the resident never had unrelieved pain, complaints of pain, or need for a PRN. ULP#3 stated when the AP worked, she insisted upon caring for the resident when working as a float or on another wing.
2025-10-15Annual Compliance VisitNo findings
Plain-language summary
A routine survey was conducted at this facility from October 13-15, 2025, and state correction orders were issued. The facility must document in its records what actions it took to comply with these correction orders within the timeframe specified on the state form, though no plans of correction need to be submitted for approval. No immediate fines were assessed for this survey.
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 Statemen tof 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), the licensee must docum ent 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 Progressiv eCare Llc Novembe r3, 2025 Page 2 x Identify how the area(s) of noncompliance was corrected related to the resident(s)/ employees( ) 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, Kelly Thorson ,Supervisor State Evaluation Team Email: Kelly.Thorson@state.mn.us Telephone :320-223-7336 Fax :1-866-890-9290 KKM PRINTED: 11/03/2025 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 _____________________________ 28964 10/15/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 1420 PRAIRIE AVENUE PROGRESSIVE CARE LLC GLENCOE, MN 55336 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 Correction Orders ASSISTED LIVING PROVIDER LICENSING using federal software. Tag numbers have CORRECTION ORDER(S) been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities. The In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section assigned tag number appears in the 144G.08 to 144G.95, these correction orders are far-left column entitled "ID Prefix Tag." issued pursuant to a survey. The state Statute number and the corresponding text of the state Statute out Determination of whether violations are corrected of compliance is listed in the "Summary requires compliance with all requirements Statement of Deficiencies" column. This provided at the Statute number indicated below. column also includes the findings which When Minnesota Statute contains several items, are in violation of the state requirement failure to comply with any of the items will be after the statement, "This Minnesota considered lack of compliance. requirement is not met as evidenced by." Following the evaluators ' findings is the INITIAL COMMENTS: Time Period for Correction. SL28964016-0 PLEASE DISREGARD THE HEADING OF THE FOURTH COLUMN WHICH On October 13, 2025, through October 15, 2025, STATES,"PROVIDER'S PLAN OF the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a CORRECTION." THIS APPLIES TO full survey at the above provider and the FEDERAL DEFICIENCIES ONLY. THIS following correction orders are issued. At the time WILL APPEAR ON EACH PAGE. of the survey, there were 70 residents; 70 receiving services under the Assisted Living THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO Facility with Dementia 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 ISSUED PURSUANT TO 144G.31 SUBDIVISION 1-3. 0 480 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum 0 480 SS=F requirements; required food services LABORATORY DIRECTOR'S OR PROVIDER/SUPPLIER REPRESENTATIVE'S SIGNATURE TITLE (X6) DATE STATE FORM 6899 Y5ZW11 If continuation sheet 1 of 9 PRINTED: 11/03/2025 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 _____________________________ 28964 10/15/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 1420 PRAIRIE AVENUE PROGRESSIVE CARE LLC GLENCOE, MN 55336 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 (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the 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, STATE FORM 6899 Y5ZW11 If continuation sheet 2 of 9 PRINTED: 11/03/2025 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 _____________________________ 28964 10/15/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 1420 PRAIRIE AVENUE PROGRESSIVE CARE LLC GLENCOE, MN 55336 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 2 0 480 existing floor, wall, and ceiling finishes are allowed provided the facility keeps them clean and in good condition; (6) notwithstanding Minnesota Rules, part 4626.
1 older inspection from 2023 are not shown in the free view.
1 older inspection (2023–2023) are available with a premium membership.
Family reviews
No reviews yet — be the first to share your experience
No published reviews yet. Use the button above to share your experience.