Citations in Minnesota
Statistics, citations and compliance trends for long-term care facilities in Minnesota.
Statistics for Minnesota (Last 12 Months)
Financial Impact (Last 12 Months)
Latest citations in Minnesota
Nurse staffing posting missing resident census. The nurse staff posting observed by the DON office listed nursing hours by shift and discipline, but the census section was blank. The DON confirmed the census should have been included, and facility policy required the resident census at the beginning of the shift to be posted with the staffing information.
Insufficient dietary staffing resulted in delayed supper service and improvised meal substitutions when the pm cook did not report. Residents reported late meals, sandwiches served before pizza arrived, and difficulty with the food provided. Staff interviews and labor records showed repeated pm cook coverage problems, with the DM, DON, and corporate staff involved in arranging emergency food service and alternate diet meals after the scheduled cook failed to work.
A resident with an indwelling Foley catheter had EBP identified in the care plan, but staff did not consistently wear gowns during close contact care, including vital signs, medication administration, hygiene-related contact, and topical treatment. In addition, a TMA administered medications to three residents without sanitizing hands between residents or before handling medications, despite policy and DON expectations requiring hand hygiene. Laundry practices were also inconsistent with sanitary handling, as staff sorted soiled laundry without gowns and gloves being available in the room and reported using only gloves for most dirty laundry tasks.
A large-screen TV in the secured unit dining room was playing a loud, violent movie during meals, with screaming, gunfire, crying, and dark scenes visible to residents seated nearby. Two residents with dementia-related cognitive impairment and behavioral issues were directly affected; one became angry and complained the TV was too loud and too dark, while another repeatedly turned off the lights and struck out at an NA when blocked. An LPN, RN, AD, and DON stated the programming was not appropriate for residents with dementia and could increase anxiety or agitation.
A resident with moderate cognitive impairment and extensive ADL needs was found with urine-soiled bedding, an unmade bed, and a mattress that was torn and heavily stained, with staff stating the damage had been present for a while. On the secured unit, all observed residents were served meals on plastic trays holding their plates, utensils, and drinks instead of having items placed directly on the table, and staff and the DON confirmed this was the routine practice.
Care plans were not individualized for two residents who frequently left the facility or failed to sign out. One resident had multiple LOAs and several instances of leaving without notifying staff, while the other resident had dementia-related diagnoses, low elopement risk, and episodes of not returning as expected or being found off the unit after stepping out to smoke. Staff interviews confirmed residents were expected to notify nursing, sign out, and provide return times, but the records did not include clear care plan interventions or staff direction for these situations.
Nurse Staffing Posting Missing Resident Census
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to include the resident census on the nurse staff posting. During an observation on 7/20/26 at 3:46 p.m., the nurse staff posting dated 7/20/26 was observed on a bulletin board by the DON office and showed the total number of nursing staff hours broken down by day, evening, and overnight shifts, with spaces for RN, LPN, TMA, and NA, but the census area was blank. During an interview on 7/20/26 at 4:00 p.m., the DON stated that the night shift was responsible for posting the nurse staff posting and verified that the census area should have been included. The DON also stated that it is important to list the census and staffing so the information is available to residents and visitors. Facility policy titled Posting Direct Care Daily Staffing, dated 9/27/22, required the form to include the facility name, the date, and the resident census at the beginning of the shift, but the direct care daily staffing posting lacked the census information.
Insufficient dietary staffing led to delayed and improvised supper service
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure sufficient dietary staff were available to prepare and serve meals in accordance with the planned menu and residents’ physician-ordered diets. The deficiency involved 5 of 5 residents interviewed about food service, including residents on regular, renal, minced and moist, and consistent carbohydrate diets. The facility’s diet type report showed these residents had ordered diets that required different textures and/or restrictions, but the events described showed the evening meal was not reliably prepared or served as planned when the pm cook was absent. Residents reported that supper was delayed or not provided as expected when there was no pm cook. One resident stated supper arrived after 8:00 p.m. and that the facility ordered pizza late in the evening. Another resident stated supper was late and that the pizza soup provided was not good and could not be eaten. A third resident stated residents were given either one-half of a ham and cheese sandwich or a peanut butter and jelly sandwich around 7:00 p.m., then pizza was ordered later, with the meal not served until about 9:00 p.m. Another resident stated residents did not receive supper until an hour or more after it was due and that one-half of a sandwich was distributed before pizza arrived. One resident stated there had been a similar incident shortly after admission when there had not been a cook for the evening shift. Staff interviews and records showed repeated problems with pm cook coverage. A cook stated there had been no pm cook on the affected day, that she left when her shift ended, and that another scheduled cook had told her he could not work. The dietary aide stated he prepared sandwiches and fruit for residents, and the dietary regional director later came to the facility and brought pizza. The dietary manager stated he completed the schedules, used corporate float staff when available, and that nursing staff could contact him or the administrator if dietary staff did not report. He also stated the day had been a bad situation because neither he nor the administrator was available when both scheduled pm cooks did not report. Timecards and labor reports reviewed by surveyors showed instances where the pm cook was scheduled but worked only briefly, arrived late, or was not scheduled at all. The dietary regional director stated she was contacted about the lack of pm cook coverage, ordered and brought pizza, and prepared alternate diet meals, including pureed pizza with applesauce and pudding or a sandwich with diced peaches for residents requiring alternate diets. The dietitian stated the facility should have followed the planned menus and had a written plan of action for when a pm cook did not report.
Failure to Use EBP, Perform Hand Hygiene, and Maintain Sanitary Laundry Practices
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to implement enhanced barrier precautions (EBP) for a resident with an indwelling Foley catheter. The resident’s annual MDS identified cognitive impairment, diagnoses including obstructive and reflux uropathy, bladder neck obstruction, and urine retention, and that the resident used an indwelling catheter. The care plan, revised 6/8/26, directed staff to follow infection control protocols, post an EBP sign on the resident’s door, communicate the need for EBP, and use appropriate PPE during high-contact care. During observation, the resident had an EBP identifier and sign posted, and PPE supplies were available outside the room, but staff did not consistently wear gowns during close contact care. An LPN entered the resident’s room wearing gloves but no gown to obtain vital signs, stood close while applying and removing the blood pressure cuff, then removed gloves, performed hand hygiene, retrieved medications, and returned to the room without gloves or a gown to administer medications while touching the overbed table, water mug, and personal belongings. A NA entered the room without a gown or gloves and stood against the bed with her uniform touching the linens and overbed table before exiting after using hand sanitizer. An RN applied topical cream to the resident’s legs while wearing gloves but no gown. The nurse manager stated all staff were expected to wear a gown and gloves whenever coming into close contact with the resident, while the RN stated gowns were only needed when emptying the catheter. The facility also failed to ensure hand hygiene during medication administration for three residents. A TMA prepared and administered medications to three residents without washing or sanitizing hands between residents or before handling medications, and stated she only sanitized her hands when medications were powdery or when giving lactulose. The DON stated staff were expected to sanitize hands before and after preparing medications for a resident and between residents, and the medication administration policy required hand hygiene before passing medications, prior to handling medications, and after coming in contact with a resident. In addition, laundry services were not conducted in a sanitary manner: the soiled laundry room contained multiple soiled laundry bins, no gowns or gloves were available in the room, and a laundry worker stated she wore only gloves except when removing items from the soaking bin or handling biohazard bagged laundry. The housekeeping/laundry supervisor stated staff were expected to wear a gown and gloves whenever working with dirty laundry and remove them before working with clean laundry.
Loud Violent TV Programming in Secured Unit Dining Area
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to provide a calm, comfortable, low-stimulation environment on the secured unit by allowing loud, violent television programming to be played in the common dining area. During observation, a large-screen television was placed in the center of the dining room with residents seated directly in front of and beside it, and the volume was very loud. The movie contained dark scenes that were difficult to see unless seated directly in front of the screen, along with loud screaming, hollering, gunfire, crying, and weeping throughout the program. Two residents reviewed for quality of life were directly affected by the environment. R2 had moderate cognitive impairment and diagnoses including hemiplegia, generalized anxiety disorder, mild neurocognitive disorder, and cerebral infarction. R2’s care plan identified mood and behavior alterations, a history of agitation, verbal behaviors, resident-to-resident altercations, and profanity, with interventions including redirection to a quiet area, offering music with headphones, and maintaining a consistent environment. While seated near the dining room/common area, R2 angrily stated the television was too loud and too dark to see or follow, repeatedly expressed frustration with the programming, and said the staff were "so fucking stupid" and that he needed to leave the facility. R46 had moderate cognitive impairment and diagnoses including dysphagia, restlessness, agitation, seizures, and anxiety. R46’s care plan identified altered mood and behaviors and included redirecting the resident to the day room to watch television. During the evening meal, the same loud violent movie was playing while about twelve residents ate in the dining room. R46 repeatedly wheeled to the light switch and turned the lights off, causing several residents to shout for the lights to be turned back on; after staff restored the lights, R46 turned them off again and then struck out at a nursing assistant when blocked. Staff interviews stated the movie was not appropriate for residents with dementia, could contribute to anxiety and agitation, and did not create a low-stimulation environment.
Soiled Mattress and Tray-Based Meal Service
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to replace a torn, stained mattress and did not ensure urine-soiled bedding was changed timely for a resident who had moderate cognitive impairment and required extensive assistance with dressing, grooming, toileting hygiene, transfers, and wheelchair mobility. The resident’s diagnoses included COPD, anxiety, and schizophrenia. The resident was observed stating that his bedsheet was wet with urine and that he was looking for staff to change it. Later, his bed was observed unmade with a rumpled soiled top sheet on the mattress and a strong urine odor in the room. When a nursing assistant later changed the resident’s linens, the mattress was found to have a 6-cm tear, a large 12 x 12-inch deep brown dry stain in the center, and scattered discoloration across the remaining surface. Staff stated the mattress had been stained and ripped for a while, and maintenance said they had only received a work order that day to replace it. The facility also failed to remove residents’ meal plates, beverages, and utensils from institutional serving trays before meal service for all 27 residents on the secured unit. During multiple meal observations, residents were served and ate from plastic trays that held their plates of food, silverware, and drinks. Staff continued this practice at breakfast, lunch, and dinner observations, and one nursing assistant stated that although it looked more homelike when plates and utensils were placed directly on the table, that was not how it was done at the facility. An RN stated the facility served meals on trays and was not sure why, and the DON stated the facility had previously used a steam cart to dish up food correctly but had switched to serving meals on trays after the cart broke.
Care plans lacked LOA and sign-out interventions
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to develop and revise comprehensive, person-centered care plans to address resident-specific interventions for leaves of absence (LOAs) and for situations when residents left the facility without notifying staff or signing out. The deficiency involved 2 residents, R10 and R37, whose records and staff interviews showed repeated LOAs and instances of leaving without signing out, but whose care plans did not reflect specific interventions or staff direction for those events. R10’s record showed a complex medical history including diabetes, a diabetic foot ulcer, wound infection, alcohol use disorder, and chronic suicidal ideation. Although an elopement risk assessment identified R10 as low risk, progress notes from 6/1/26 through 7/12/26 documented 11 LOAs, including 3 occasions when R10 did not sign out. Staff interviews stated R10 was expected to notify nursing before leaving, provide an approximate return time, and sign out, but the medical record did not reflect interventions for when R10 left the facility or failed to sign out. The DON acknowledged that for a resident who frequently left the facility, those expectations should have been reflected in the care plan so staff would know what actions were required. R37’s record showed mild cognitive impairment, dementia-related diagnoses, and an elopement risk score placing R37 at low risk. Nursing notes documented that R37 did not return from an LOA on one occasion and, on another occasion, was found not to be in the building after stepping out to smoke. Staff interviews stated R37 often forgot to sign out and was re-educated when he returned, but the medical record lacked care plan updates for safety plans in the community or interventions when R37 did not sign out. The RN and DON both stated the care plan should have been updated to address R37’s failure to sign out and to direct staff on what should occur when he left without notifying staff or indicating when he would return.
Find your facility
Search by name to see its inspection history, citations and penalties — and how to prepare for the next survey.
Get alerted when Immediate Jeopardy citations hit in Minnesota — free
You're all set
Compliance trends in Minnesota
Data through Jun 2026Comparisons below measure the most recent period Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 against the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025 (two equal 12-month windows). The most recent 1 months are excluded because CMS is still publishing them.
Top tags by month · last 24 months
dashed = still reportingMonthly citation counts for the 5 most-cited tags. The dashed tail is the 1-month reporting lag.
Frequency movers
Biggest change in how often each tag is cited, as a rate per 100 inspections (so it isn't skewed by survey volume): Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Only tags with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown.
Severity movers
Tags whose average scope/severity shifted the most: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. The number is the average severity on the A–L scale (A=0…L=11); the letter is the band it falls in. A rise means the same tag is being cited at a more serious level — note the average can move enough to rank here while staying within the same letter. Same 20-citation minimum applies.
Care domain movers
Citations grouped into CFR care domains — F-tags by their §483 regulatory section (CMS State Operations Manual, Appendix PP) — measured as a rate per 100 inspections: Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. Share is the domain's portion of citations this period; avg severity is the mean scope/severity letter and immediate jeopardy the percentage cited at J–L, both over the current period. Domains with at least 20 citations in both periods are shown; the sparkline tracks the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Immediate jeopardies · this period
Citations at the most serious scope/severity — J–L, immediate jeopardy, residents placed at risk of serious harm or death — over Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025. "Surveys with an IJ" counts distinct health inspections that had at least one.
Survey activity · by month
faded/dashed = still reportingCitations each month split into complaint-driven (unscheduled, triggered by grievances) vs standard surveys — bars, left axis — with the number of inspections as a line on the right axis. Rising inspections signal more scrutiny; a rising complaint share means more off-cycle surveys. The most recent 1 months are still being reported.
Deficiency-free survey rate
Share of health surveys that found zero deficiencies — the odds of a clean survey. Jul 2025 – Jun 2026 vs the prior period Jul 2024 – Jun 2025; the most recent 1 months are still being reported (dashed).
Penalties · by month
faded = still reportingTotal civil money penalty dollars imposed on the state's facilities each month — how hard the state is enforcing. The most recent 1 months are still being reported, and penalties often lag citations by several months.
Emerging tags
Tags that weren't established last period but surged — an early warning, distinct from movers (which track already-common tags). Criteria: fewer than 20 citations in the prior period, but at least 10 this period and 2.5× their prior volume. The sparkline shows monthly counts over the last 12 months (left = oldest).
Trusted data from CMS and state health departments
Every citation, penalty and Plan of Correction is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 26, 2026) and official state health department websites — never guesswork.
In your survey window? See what surveyors are citing.
The Survey-Prep Report maps your facility's risk from 12 months of CMS and state citation data — what's being cited around you and what to check first. $129 one-time.
