Editorial Independence

StarlynnCare receives no referral commissions, lead fees, or paid placement from any operator. Rankings are derived solely from state inspection records and verified family reviews.

StarlynnCare
Minnesota · Marshall

Heritage Pointe Senior Living.

Heritage Pointe Senior Living is Grade C−, ranked in the bottom 47% of Minnesota memory care with 1 MDH citation on record; last inspected May 2025.

ALF · Memory Care65 licensed beds · largeDementia-trained staff
207 North 4th Street · Marshall, MN 56258LIC# ALRC:406
Limited Inspection History · fewer than 4 records in 3 years
Facility · Marshall
A 65-bed ALF · Memory Care with one citation on file (Mar 2025).
Last inspection · May 2025 · citedSource · MDH
Licensed beds
65
Memory care
✓ Yes
Last inspection
May 2025
Last citation
Mar 2025
Operated by
Phone
§ 01 · Snapshot

A large home, reviewed on public record.

§ 02 · Peer Comparison

Ranked against 142 Minnesota facilities.

ALF memory care · 36-month window. Higher percentile = better. Source: Minnesota Dept. of Health · Health Regulation Division.

Severity rank
10th
Weighted citations per bed.
peer median
0
100
Repeat rank
100th
Repeat deficiencies as share of total.
peer median
0
100
Frequency rank
31th
Deficiencies per inspection.
peer median
0
100

FACILITY WATCH · BETA

Heritage Pointe Senior Living has 1 citation on record. Know the moment anything changes.

New findings, complaint investigations, or status changes — emailed to you free.

§ 03 · The Record

Citation history, plotted month by month.

1 deficiencie on record. Each bar is a month with a citation.

10weighted score · 24 mo
Last citation: MAR 2025. Compared against peer median (dashed).
peer median
MAR 2025
Jun 2024May 2026

Finding distribution

1 total · 36 months

Scope × Severity (CMS A–L)

Isolated
Pattern
Widespread
Sev 4 · IJ
J
K
L
Sev 3
G1
H
I
Sev 2
D
E
F
Sev 1
A
B
C
§ 05 · Tour Prep

Questions to ask before you visit.

A short pre-tour checklist tailored to Heritage Pointe Senior Living's record and state requirements.

01 /

Minnesota Department of Health records show 2 complaints filed against this facility — were any of those complaints substantiated, and can you provide the facility's written response or corrective action documentation for families to review?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

02 /

The most recent MDH inspection was conducted on May 21, 2025, and resulted in zero deficiencies — can you walk us through the inspection process and show us the final inspection report and any internal quality assurance steps you took in preparation?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

03 /

This facility holds an Assisted Living Facility with Dementia Care license under Minnesota Statute chapter 144G — can you provide a copy of your written dementia care program and describe how staff are trained specifically on dementia care practices beyond general assisted living training?

Ask the operator on tour. Take notes and compare answers across facilities you visit.

§ 06 · Full Inspection Record

Every MDH visit, verbatim.

3 inspections in the public record, most recent first. Click any row to expand — cited rows open automatically.

3
reports on file
1
total deficiencies
2025-12-17
Complaint Investigation
No findings

Plain-language summary

A complaint alleged that a caregiver failed to escort a resident to the dining room as required by her care plan, resulting in a fall where the resident sustained a frontal sinus fracture; the resident was hospitalized but returned the same day and recovered to her baseline condition. The Minnesota Department of Health determined the allegation was not substantiated, finding that the caregiver made an isolated error when she was interrupted by another staff member and left the resident unattended, but the facility immediately reported the incident, provided staff education on care plans, and took corrective actions. No further action was taken by the health department.

Full inspector notes

Finding: Not Substantiated 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 by failing to escort her to the dining room as required in her care plan. Investigative Findings and Conclusion: The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. The AP, an unlicensed caregiver, made an isolated error when she did not finish escorting the resident to the dining room. The AP became distracted when unlicensed caregiver #2 asked her to help with another resident’s cares. The resident fell and sustained a frontal sinus fracture, was evaluated at the hospital, but returned the same day with no new orders. The resident subsequently returned to her baseline condition. The investigator conducted interviews with facility staff members, including administrative staff, and unlicensed staff. The investigation included review of the resident’s records, internal investigation documentation, incident reports, personnel files, staff schedules, policies, and procedures. The resident resided in an assisted living secured memory care building. The resident’s diagnoses include dementia. The resident’s service plan included assistance with all activities of daily living, as well as escort services to and from meals and preferred activities. The assessment indicated she required one-person assistance with a gait belt and walker for ambulation. One morning, the AP assisted the resident with her morning cares and followed her out of the apartment. However, the AP began assisting a different resident and did not escort the resident to the dining room and left the resident unattended in the hallway. The resident turned around, returned to her apartment leaving her walker in the hallway, and fell. During an interview, the AP stated was walking with the resident when unlicensed caregiver #2 asked for assistance with another resident. She said she went to help leaving the resident to walk to the dining room alone. The AP acknowledged the care plan indicated the resident required assistance walking to the dining room and expressed remorse over the error. During an interview, unlicensed caregiver #2 stated she asked the AP for help with another resident but did not intend for her to leave the resident unattended. She said that after assisting her resident, she passed by the resident’s room and found her on the floor. During an interview, a manager, who was also nurse, stated after reviewing the camera footage, she observed the AP leave the resident alone in the hallway and the resident returned to her apartment where she fell. She stated the AP had gone to assist another resident. The manager stated the AP had no prior disciplinary history. During an interview, a family member stated the facility called to notify her of the fall. The family said the facility provides excellent care, and she had no concerns. In conclusion, the Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. “Not Substantiated” means: An investigatory conclusion indicating the preponderance of evidence shows that an act meeting the definition of maltreatment did not occur. 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. (d) For purposes of this section, a vulnerable adult is not neglected for the sole reason that: (4) an individual makes an error in the provision of therapeutic conduct to a vulnerable adult which does not result in injury or harm which reasonably requires medical or mental health care; or (5) an individual makes an error in the provision of therapeutic conduct to a vulnerable adult that results in injury or harm, which reasonably requires the care of a physician, and: (i) the necessary care is provided in a timely fashion as dictated by the condition of the vulnerable adult; (ii) if after receiving care, the health status of the vulnerable adult can be reasonably expected, as determined by the attending physician, to be restored to the vulnerable adult's preexisting condition; (iii) the error is not part of a pattern of errors by the individual; (iv) if in a facility, the error is immediately reported as required under section 626.557, and recorded internally in the facility; (v) if in a facility, the facility identifies and takes corrective action and implements measures designed to reduce the risk of further occurrence of this error and similar errors; and (vi) if in a facility, the actions required under items (iv) and (v) are sufficiently documented for review and evaluation by the facility and any applicable licensing, certification, and ombudsman agency. Vulnerable Adult interviewed: No, the resident was diagnosed with dementia. Family/Responsible Party interviewed: Yes. Alleged Perpetrator interviewed: Yes. Action taken by facility: Immediate education was provided to the AP on following resident care plans. The resident’s care plan was reviewed, and the transfer and mobility status were updated based on current needs. Additional education on resident care plans will be completed at the upcoming home health aid’s meeting. Post-fall monitoring continued. Action taken by the Minnesota Department of Health: 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 PRINTED: 12/ 18/ 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: ______________________ C B. WING _____________________________ 29446 11/18/ 2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 207 NORTH 4TH STREET HERITAGE POINTE SENIOR LIVING MARSHALL, MN 56258 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES PROVIDER' S PLAN OF CORRECTION (X4) ID ID (X5) PREFIX (EACH DEFICIENCY MUST BE PRECEDED BY FULL PREFIX (EACH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHOULD BE COMPLETE REGULATORY OR LSC IDENTIFYING INFORMATION) CROSS- REFERENCED TO THE APPROPRIATE DATE TAG TAG DEFICIENCY) 0 000 Initial Comments 0 000 On November 18, 2025, the Minnesota Department of Health initiated an investigation of complaints #HL294466962M/ HL294466443C. No correction order is issued. LABORATORY DIRECTOR' S OR PROVIDER/ SUPPLIER REPRESENTATIVE' S SIGNATURE TITLE (X6) DATE STATE FORM 6899 IQO711 If continuation sheet 1 of 1

2025-05-21
Annual Compliance Visit
No findings

Plain-language summary

A routine inspection of Heritage Pointe Senior Living on May 21, 2025 found one violation related to fire protection and physical environment under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 144G. The facility was assessed a $500 fine for this Level 2 violation and must document the actions it took to correct the deficiency.

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 necessary to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of residents in your care. STATE CORRECTIO NORDERS 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 Requirement is not met as evidenced by . . ." IMPOSITION OF FINES In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G.31, Subd. 4, fines and enforcement actions may be imposed based on the level and scope of the violations and may be imposed immediately with no opportunity to correct the violation first as follows: Level 1: no fines or enforcement. Level 2: a fine of $500 per violation, in addition to any enforcement mechanism authorized in § 144G.20 for widespread violations; Level 3: a fine of $3,000 per violation per incident, in addition to any enforcement mechanism authorized in § 144G.20. An equal opportunity employer. Letter ID: IS7N REVISE D09/13/2021 Heritage Pointe Senior Living July 25, 2025 Page 2 Level 4: a fine of $5,000 per incident, in addition to any enforcement mechanism authorized in § 144G.20. Therefore, in accordance with Minn. Stat. §§ 144G.01 to 144G.9999, the following fines are assessed pursuant to this survey: 0775 - 144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment - $500.00 The refor e, in accor danc e wit h Minn. Sta t. §§ 144G.01 to 144G.999 9, the total amount you are assessed is $500.00. You will be invoiced approximately 30 days after receipt of this notice, subject to appeal . DOCUMENTATIO ONF ACTION TO COMPLY In accorda nce with Min n. Stat. § 144G.30, Sub d. 5(c), th e lic ens ee mus t docum ent ac tions taken t o 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: Identify how the area( s) of noncompliance was corrected related to the · resident( s)/ employee( s) identified in the correction order. 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. Identify what changes to your systems and practices were made to ensure compliance with · the specific statute( s). CORRECTIO NORDER RECONSIDERATIO PNROCESS In accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G.32, Subd. 2, you may challenge the correction order( s) issued, including the level and scope, and any fine assessed through 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 REQUESTIN GA HEARING Alternatively, in accordance with Minn. Stat. § 144G.31, Subd. 5(d), an assisted living provider that has been assessed a fine under this subdivision has a right to a reconsideration or a hearing under this section and chapter 14. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 144G.20, Subd. 14 and Subd. 18, a request for a hearing must be in writing and received by the Department of Health within 15 business days of the correction order receipt date. The request must contain a brief and plain statement describing each matter or issue contested and any new information you believe constitutes a defense or mitigating factor. Heritage Pointe Senior Living July 25, 2025 Page 3 To submit a hearing request, please visit: https: / / forms. web. health. state. mn. us/ form/ HRDAppealsForm To appe al fi nes via re cons iderat ion , pl ease follow the procedu r e outl ined abo ve. Plea se no te tha t you may re que st a rec onside rati on or a hearing, bu t not bot h. If you wish to cont est ta gs with out fine s in a reconsideration and tags with the fines at a hearing, please submit two separate appeals forms at the website listed above. 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 conv enien ce at thi s link: https: / / forms. office.com/ g/ Bm5uQEpHVa. Your inpu t is import ant to us and will enable MDH to improve its processes and communication with providers. If you have any questions regarding the questionnaire, please contact Susan Winkelmann at susan. winkelmann@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 organization’s Governing Body. If you have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Jodi Johnson, Supervisor State Evaluation Team Email: jodi.johnson@ state. mn.us Tel ephon e: 507-344- 2730 Fax: 1-866- 890- 9290 JMD PRINTED: 07/ 25/ 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 _____________________________ 29446 05/ 21/ 2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 207 NORTH 4TH STREET HERITAGE POINTE SENIOR LIVING MARSHALL, MN 56258 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES PROVIDER' S PLAN OF CORRECTION (X4) ID ID (X5) PREFIX (EACH DEFICIENCY MUST BE PRECEDED BY FULL PREFIX (EACH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHOULD BE COMPLETE 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. " The issued pursuant to a survey. 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. SL29446016- 0 PLEASE DISREGARD THE HEADING OF THE FOURTH COLUMN WHICH On May 19, 2025, through May 21, 2025, the STATES, "PROVIDER' S PLAN OF survey at the above provider and the following FEDERAL DEFICIENCIES ONLY. THIS correction orders are issued. At the time of the WILL APPEAR ON EACH PAGE. survey, there were 61 residents; 55 receiving services under the Assisted Living Facility with THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO 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 0CKT11 If continuation sheet 1 of 8 PRINTED: 07/ 25/ 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.

2025-03-21
Complaint Investigation
1 · Substantiated Finding

Plain-language summary

A complaint investigation found that the facility neglected a resident when unlicensed staff failed to notify a registered nurse after the resident fell and began complaining of severe leg pain, delaying emergency room care by 15 hours and pain management. The resident was hospitalized with a hip fracture, severe sepsis, and other complications; the facility's service plan did not clearly document how the resident should be assisted with walking, and staff were not trained on when to contact a nurse about changes in condition. The facility was found responsible for the maltreatment.

Substantiated FindingMinn. Stat. §MN-SUBST
Verbatim citation text · Minn. Stat. §MN-SUBST

MDH substantiated maltreatment or licensing violation finding

Full inspector notes

Finding: Substantiated, facility 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 facility neglected the resident when facility staff failed to follow the care plan resulting in the resident falling and being hospitalized with a hip fracture. Investigative Findings and Conclusion: The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was substantiated. The facility was responsible for the maltreatment. An unlicensed facility staff member did not use a gait belt at the time of the fall; however, neglect occurred following the fall when multiple unlicensed staff failed to notify a registered nurse (RN) when the resident began to complain of severe leg pain and a decline in mobility which delayed medical intervention and pain management. The resident was not transferred to the emergency room for 15 hours after the initial complaints of pain. The investigator conducted interviews with facility staff members, including administrative staff, nursing staff, and unlicensed staff. The investigation included review of the resident record, hospital records, facility internal investigation documentation, facility incident reports, personnel files, staff schedules, and related facility policy and procedures. Also, the investigator observed resident cares and staff interactions. The resident resided in an assisted living memory care unit. The resident’s diagnoses included vascular dementia, congestive heart failure, and atrial fibrillation. The resident also received hospice services. The resident’s service plan included assistance with medication management, toileting assistance, dressing, grooming, and oxygen management. Under the notes/alerts section of the service plan, it was indicated that the resident required one assist for transfers, and a wheelchair for mobility, but transfer assistance was not included as a service the resident required. The service plan did not indicate how the resident should be assisted with walking. The resident’s assessment indicated the resident resided required assist of one with a gait belt and walker for transfers and ambulation. The assessment indicated the resident was cognitively impaired and had no history of recent falls or pain. Facility documentation indicated the resident was transferred to the bathroom, lost her balance and was lowered to the floor around 8:40 p.m. The unlicensed staff did not use a gait belt prior to the fall. The unlicensed staff contacted the hospice nurse and were directed to use a mechanical lift to transfer the resident off the floor since the resident did not hit her head and was not complaining of pain at that time. During the transfer, the resident began to complain of pain and continued to complain of pain while the staff turned and repositioned the resident in bed. The night staff indicated the resident was in pain during the night and would yell in pain during turning and repositioning. Facility documentation did not include notification of a nurse after the resident began to complain of pain. Documentation also did not indicate that as-needed pain medications or other interventions were administered despite the resident’s continued complaints of pain. The resident’s family was not notified of the fall or ongoing complaints of pain until the hospice nurse called around 11:00 a.m. the next day. Emergency room (ER) and hospital records indicated the resident presented to the emergency room after a fall last night with complaints of left leg pain. Hospital diagnoses included left hip fracture, severe sepsis secondary to a urinary tract infection, and hypokalemia (low potassium). The resident was deemed a poor surgical candidate and family agreed to comfort care measures. During the hospital stay, the resident received intravenous pain medications and antibiotics. The resident discharged back to the facility four days later with orders for antibiotics and pain medication. During investigative interviews, multiple staff members stated the resident began to complain of pain while being transferred off the floor with a mechanical lift following the fall. The resident continued to complain of pain while staff were assisting the resident with turning and repositioning. Staff stated the resident would scream, holler, or yell in pain when they moved or touched her. Multiple unlicensed staff members stated they did not contact a nurse because they thought hospice was going to come the next morning. During an interview, the licensed practical nurse (LPN) stated she was informed the next morning around 7:00 a.m. that the resident fell and had discomfort. The LPN stated she contacted the hospice nurse and the resident’s family member. The LPN did not contact the facility registered nurse (RN) to conduct an assessment prior to arrival of the hospice nurse. During an interview, the facility RN stated she was not contacted after the resident complained of pain. Facility staff should have contacted the RN for instruction and a RN should have come in to assess the resident following the fall. The RN confirmed there had not been facility wide education regarding notification of a RN following complaints of pain or a change in condition following the incident. During an interview, the resident’s family stated they were not contacted by anyone from the facility about the resident’s fall and severe pain until the next day around 11:00 a.m. when the hospice nurse contacted them. The resident’s family stated if they would have known the resident was in pain, they would have had the resident brought to the ER for pain management. The resident’s family stated the resident’s quality of life has greatly decreased since the fall as she is not able to get out of bed due to the hip fracture and pain. 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, due to cognition. Family/Responsible Party interviewed: Yes Alleged Perpetrator interviewed: Yes Action taken by facility: The facility initiated an investigation of the incident. Action taken by the Minnesota Department of Health: The facility was found to be in noncompliance. To view a copy of the Statement of Deficiencies and/or correction orders, please visit: https://www.health.state.mn.us/facilities/regulation/directory/provcompselect.html If you are viewing this report on the MDH website, please see the attached Statement of Deficiencies. You may also call 651-201-4200 to receive a copy via mail or email cc: The Office of Ombudsman for Long Term Care The Office of Ombudsman for Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Lyon County Attorney Marshall City Attorney Marshall Police Department PRINTED: 04/03/2025 FORM APPROVED STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES (X1) PROVIDER/SUPPLIER/CLIA (X2) MULTIPLE CONSTRUCTION (X3) DATE SURVEY AND PLAN OF CORRECTION IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: COMPLETED A. BUILDING: ______________________ C B. WING _____________________________ 29446 01/28/2025 NAME OF PROVIDER OR SUPPLIER STREET ADDRESS, CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE 207 NORTH 4TH STREET HERITAGE POINTE SENIOR LIVING MARSHALL, MN 56258 SUMMARY STATEMENT OF DEFICIENCIES PROVIDER'S PLAN OF CORRECTION (X4) ID ID (X5) PREFIX (EACH DEFICIENCY MUST BE PRECEDED BY FULL PREFIX (EACH CORRECTIVE ACTION SHOULD BE COMPLETE 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 CORRECTION using federal software. Tag numbers have ORDER 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." The issued pursuant to a complaint investigation. state Statute number and the corresponding text of the state Statute out Determination of whether a violation is 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.

1 older inspection from 2022 are not shown in the free view.

1 older inspection (20222023) are available with a premium membership.

§ 07 · Nearby

Other facilities in Marshall.

Other memory care facilities near Marshall 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.

Related in this city

Other memory care options nearby.

Is this listing wrong? Report an issue →
Reports help us maintain accurate facility information. Your report will be reviewed within 1-2 business days.