Crest View Lutheran Home
4444 Reservoir Boulevard Northeast, Columbia Heights, MN 55421 · Anoka County · 106 certified beds · avg 86 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1967
Abuse citation flag (CMS)
The abuse flag means inspectors cited this facility for abuse that caused harm to a resident within the past year, or potential for harm in each of the last two years. Source: CMS.
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★☆☆☆☆1/5 · CMS overall rating: 1/5
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 self-reported quality measures.
Most serious findings (actual harm or immediate jeopardy)
▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Mar 2, 2023 · F-0578
The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care.
Why it matters: Ignoring these rights means residents may receive treatments they refused, or miss having their end-of-life wishes respected.
Severity (J): Inspectors found a situation that put a resident's life or safety in immediate danger, affecting one or a few residents. The facility must fix it immediately — these citations often come with large fines.
Corrected: Apr 10, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Mar 19, 2026 · F-0600 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors.
Why it matters: Abuse and neglect cause direct physical and emotional harm and are among the most serious failures a nursing home can have.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Mar 16, 2026 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Dec 10, 2025 · F-0689 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Why it matters: This is one of the most common citations and directly relates to falls and injuries, which can be devastating for older adults.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Nov 13, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Oct 30, 2024 · F-0745 · triggered by a complaint
The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life.
Why it matters: Without social services support, residents can struggle emotionally and miss out on help they're entitled to.
Severity (G): One or a few residents were actually harmed — physically or emotionally — though not put in immediate danger of serious injury or death.
Corrected: Nov 23, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)
All citations in the current public record (47)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2026 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents from abuse or neglect. This covers physical, mental, and sexual abuse, physical punishment, and neglect, by anyone — staff, other residents, or visitors. · from a complaint |
| Dec 10, 2025 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The 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. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have firmly secured handrails on both sides of its hallways. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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). |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. · from a complaint |
| Jun 26, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not make its inspection results easy for residents to see, or made it hard for residents to contact advocacy agencies like the ombudsman. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures to prevent abuse, neglect, and theft. These written safeguards are the foundation of resident protection. · from a complaint |
| Oct 30, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the social services residents need — such as counseling, help with adjustment, or connecting to outside resources — to achieve the best possible quality of life. · from a complaint |
| Oct 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. · from a complaint |
| Oct 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · from a complaint |
| Jul 29, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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 |
| May 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 4, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | 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. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not give residents (and their representatives and the ombudsman, a state advocate for residents) proper advance notice before a transfer or discharge, including information about their right to appeal. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not allow residents to take their own medications when a clinical review showed they could do so safely. Residents have this right if their care team determines it's appropriate. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not make reasonable adjustments to fit each resident's individual needs and preferences — things like call buttons within reach, preferred wake-up times, or accessible room setups. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not fully assess residents on time — a complete assessment of health, abilities, and needs is required when a resident is first admitted and at least once every 12 months after that. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Apr 4, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | ▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, one-off | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents proper notice about what Medicare or Medicaid covers, or about charges the resident might owe for services that aren't covered. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility allowed residents to lose the ability to do daily activities — like bathing, dressing, and eating — when there was no medical reason for the decline. Good care helps residents keep the abilities they have. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide pharmacy services that meet each resident's needs, or did not employ or contract with a licensed pharmacist. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Mar 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have a working program to monitor how antibiotics are used. Tracking antibiotic use helps make sure these drugs are given only when needed and remain effective. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 20).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 10 | 1 | J ▲ |
| 2024 | 14 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 22 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2026 | 1 | 1 | G ▲ |
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)
1 fine totaling $16,720.
| Date | Type | Amount / length |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 19, 2026 | Fine | $16,720 |
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Minnesota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.62 | 4.83 | 3.95 | bottom 43% in Minnesota; top 20% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.12 | 1.22 | 0.69 | bottom 49% in Minnesota; top 11% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.36 | 4.27 | 3.50 | top 44% in Minnesota; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.78 | 0.69 | 0.48 | top 29% in Minnesota; top 12% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 0.0 | 42.2 | 45.8 | — |
| RN turnover (%) | 0.0 | 38.6 | 42.9 | — |
Hours are per resident per day, 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 4.19, RN 1.02, weekend 3.95. Staffing rating: 3/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 2/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Who owns this facility
Non profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahrendt, Andrew | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/19/2018 |
| Anderson, Gabrielle | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2024 |
| Anderson, Gabrielle | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/07/2025 |
| Fox, Terese | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/07/2025 |
| Greenberg, Joseph | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2026 |
| Greenberg, Joseph | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/12/2026 |
| Johnson, Chris | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 07/01/2022 |
| Johnson, Chris | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 02/06/2025 |
| Landreville, Mark | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 11/12/2024 |
| Melton, Jennifer | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/07/2025 |
| Melton, Jennifer | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/07/2025 |
| Miller, John | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Moe, Sherilyn | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
| Olson, Wayne | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/01/2024 |
| Teske, Glen | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/01/2022 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "How do you record and honor each resident's treatment wishes and advance directives, and how do staff know about them?"
- "Tell me about this abuse or neglect citation — what happened, and what specific changes did you make afterward?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "Who provides social services here, and how would they support my family member's emotional and social needs?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Benedictine Health Center Innsbruck | 1.4 mi | New Brighton, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Bywood East Health Care | 1.5 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | abuseSFF |
| St Anthony Health & Rehabilitation | 1.5 mi | St Anthony, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| New Brighton Care Center | 2.2 mi | New Brighton, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Villas at New Brighton | 2.5 mi | New Brighton, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Victory Health and Rehabilitation Center | 2.5 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Estates at Fridley LLC | 2.6 mi | Fridley, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | abuse |
| Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills | 2.9 mi | Arden Hills, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Catholic Eldercare on Main | 4.0 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Langton Shores | 4.4 mi | Roseville, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| The Estates at Roseville LLC | 5.0 mi | Roseville, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Good Samaritan Society - Specialty Care Community | 5.0 mi | Robbinsdale, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Columbia Heights →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245018.