Minnesota ›Minneapolis

Benedictine Health Center of Minneapolis

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

618 East 17th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 (opens Google Maps) · Hennepin County · (612) 879-2811· 90 certified beds · avg 85 residents/day · certified since Feb 24, 1984 · Medicare and Medicaid certified

Certified for both programmes. Certification means the facility can bill Medicaid — it does not mean a Medicaid-funded bed is free right now, so ask directly. Who pays for nursing home care →

Part of chain: BENEDICTINE HEALTH SYSTEM (23 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 3, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Jun 18, 2024
$84,774
Fines, last 3 years
4.05
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

New to these records? How to read an inspection report →

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5 · how star ratings work →

The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and quality measures from resident assessments and claims.

Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, isolated · Jun 18, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

Severity (J): Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety was cited. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jun 19, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · May 23, 2024 · F-0686 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving.

Why it matters: Bedsores are painful, can become deeply infected, and in serious cases can be life-threatening.

Severity (G): Actual harm was cited, below immediate jeopardy. The scope was isolated: limited residents, staff, or locations were affected. Scope describes the extent of the deficiency, not whether it happened on previous inspections.

Corrected: Jun 14, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 31 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread

    The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. F-0880

  2. E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern

    The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. F-0921

  3. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. F-0609

View all 31 inspection findingsShow only the latest 3 findings

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed — that window is CMS's, not ours. Within it, every citation CMS publishes for this facility is listed here: none excluded.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Apr 3, 2026F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespreadThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Apr 3, 2026E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · F-0609
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide required paperwork or notices about a resident's needs, their right to appeal a transfer or discharge, or the facility's bed-hold policy (how long a bed is saved during a hospital stay). · F-0628
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · F-0641
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · F-0656
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
Apr 3, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757
Jan 16, 2025E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences. · F-0553
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not develop a resident's complete plan of care within 7 days of the full assessment, or the plan wasn't prepared, reviewed, and updated by a team of health professionals as required. · F-0657
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide the help residents need with basic daily activities — like bathing, dressing, eating, and using the bathroom — for residents who cannot do these things on their own. · F-0677
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility used bed rails without first trying safer alternatives, or without assessing the resident's safety risk, discussing the risks and benefits with the resident or family, getting consent, and installing the rails correctly. · F-0700
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not try to gradually reduce doses of mood- and mind-altering medications or use non-drug approaches first, as required, or used 'as needed' psychiatric drugs without proper limits. · F-0758
Jan 16, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · F-0880
Oct 31, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate respiratory care — such as oxygen, breathing treatments, or care for residents on breathing equipment — for residents who needed it. · from a complaint · F-0695
Jun 27, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
Jun 18, 2024▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, isolatedThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · from a complaint · F-0684
May 23, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not provide proper care for pressure ulcers (bedsores) or did not do enough to prevent new ones from forming. Bedsores develop when residents stay in one position too long without help moving. · from a complaint · F-0686
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft to the proper authorities quickly enough, or did not report the results of its investigation. · from a complaint · F-0609
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not respond appropriately to alleged violations, such as reports of abuse, neglect, or mistreatment. Facilities must investigate every allegation and protect residents while they do. · from a complaint · F-0610
May 23, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. · from a complaint · F-0880
Nov 9, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility used feeding tubes without a valid medical reason or the resident's agreement, or did not provide proper care to residents who have feeding tubes. · F-0693
Nov 9, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not label drugs according to professional standards or did not store them in locked compartments, with controlled drugs (medications with a high risk of misuse) kept under a separate lock. · from a complaint · F-0761
Nov 9, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · F-0812
Nov 9, 2023E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · F-0921
Nov 9, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. · F-0645
Oct 13, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint · F-0689

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 8).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 6
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 7
Serious citations (G–L): 2
2025
All citations: 10
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 0

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202360E
202472J ▲
2025100E
202680F

Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.

Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)

How to file a complaint about care →

1 fine totaling $84,774, plus 1 Medicare payment denial period.

Every penalty CMS publishes for this facility in the 3-year window is listed —none excluded. The count and the dollar total come from two different CMS datasets and agree for this facility. Penalties older than the window are dropped by CMS before publication, not by us.

DateTypeAmount / length
May 23, 2024Fine$84,774
May 23, 2024Payment Denial37 days from Jun 19, 2024

Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)

What these staffing numbers mean →

Nurse time, in contextAdjusted hours per resident per day · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
This facilityMinnesota averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.05
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.93
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.63
Minnesota average: 4.27
U.S. average: 3.50

All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.

MeasureThis facilityMinnesota avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.054.833.95bottom 17% in Minnesota; top 37% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.931.220.69top 6% in Minnesota; top 2% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.634.273.50bottom 20% in Minnesota; top 36% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)2.030.690.48top 2% in Minnesota; top 1% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)25.642.245.8top 12% in Minnesota; top 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)22.838.642.9top 25% in Minnesota; top 18% in the U.S.

Hours are per resident per day for the most recent quarter of payroll data in this CMS release (2026-08-01) — the same quarter for every facility — case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 4.98, RN 2.37, weekend 4.47.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.98 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 5/5.

Quality measures: assessments & claims

Note: CMS combines facility-reported resident assessments (MDS) with claims-based measures. These are different sources from on-site inspection findings. Read the measures alongside inspection and staffing records; a high QM rating does not establish that a home is safe.

Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Benedictine Health Center of Minneapolis. CMS inspection and staffing records do not tell us what this home will charge you.

Calculate a stay from a quote you receive

Use a written private-pay quote. This worksheet adds only the amounts you enter; it does not calculate Medicare, Medicaid or insurance benefits.

Formula: (room rate + daily extras) × days + one-time charges. A 30-day scenario is not a calendar-month quote. Refundable deposits, rate changes and charges you omit are not automatically included. Entries are not saved or sent to our server.

Before you compare prices

  • Request the room type, effective date and itemized daily rate in writing.
  • Ask about therapy, medicines, supplies, care-level charges, deposits, refunds and annual increases.
  • Confirm insurance or Medicaid eligibility and bed availability directly; certification alone does not guarantee either.

Understand who pays for care · How we handle price evidence · Report an incorrect price

Who owns this facility

How to read ownership records →

Ownership records as published by CMS on 2026-08-01. CMS records when an owner joined but not when they left. Listed here and no longer involved? Tell us →

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Benedictine Health SystemOrganizationDirect Ownership InterestNOT APPLICABLE10/02/2000
Benedictine Health SystemOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/02/2000
Benedictine Health SystemOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/02/2000
Benson, JeffreyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE08/06/2014
Bergien, TriciaIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE11/01/2016
Hack, TaylarIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2022
Hoel, DavidIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE09/01/2015
Mielke, JohnIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE04/11/2025
Mielke, JohnIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE04/11/2025
Momanyi, PeterIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/25/2022
Momanyi, PeterIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE06/18/2025
Pearson, LynetteIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE07/01/2021
Rymanowski, KevinIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2008
Will, TheresaIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE02/01/2025

All 14 owning or managing parties CMS has on file are shown — none excluded.

Other facilities in the same chain

CMS lists this facility under the chain Benedictine Health System — 23 facilities in the current records. Chain membership says who operates these homes. It says nothing about how any individual one of them was inspected; each has its own record.

Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 22 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.

Questions to ask on your visit

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.

  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "How do you prevent bedsores for residents who can't move themselves, and how often are at-risk residents repositioned?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can we tour the whole building today, including resident bathrooms and common areas, not just the lobby?"
  • "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
  • "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
  • "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"

Also worth asking anywhere

  • "Your weekend nurse staffing is reported below the Minnesota midpoint — how does the weekend schedule differ from a weekday?"
  • "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
  • "CMS reports 26% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 14 owning or managing parties — who makes the decisions about staffing levels?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (12 closest of 97 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
The Estates at Chateau LLC0.5 miMinneapolis, MN★★☆☆☆1/5
Andrew Residence0.5 miMinneapolis, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Southside Care Center1.3 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5SFF
Fairview University Trans Serv1.6 miMinneapolis, MN★★★★★5/5
Redeemer Health Care Center1.7 miMinneapolis, MN★★★★★3/5
Birchwood Care Home1.7 miMinneapolis, MN★★★★★4/5
Catholic Eldercare on Main2.0 miMinneapolis, MN★★★☆☆2/5
Villas at Bryn Mawr LLC2.2 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Lakehouse Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center2.5 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Providence Place2.5 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Grand Avenue Rest Home2.9 miMinneapolis, MN★★★☆☆2/5
Jones Harrison Residence3.0 miMinneapolis, MN★★★☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Hennepin, MN — 54 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Minneapolis →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245266.

This page is the printable visit checklist. If your browser did not open the print dialog automatically, use File → Print (Ctrl/⌘-P).

Your research

Viewed & saved homes

Kept in this browser tab for this session. Choose to remember them only on a device you trust. Opening a record or comparison sends its usual page request.

Selected for comparison

Recently viewed

Prices entered in a cost worksheet stay on that page and are not saved. Privacy details