Edenbrook of St Cloud
1717 University Drive Southeast, Saint Cloud, MN 56304 · Stearns County · 77 certified beds · avg 67 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1987
Part of chain: EDEN SENIOR CARE (21 facilities, chain avg rating 2.6★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.00
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
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)
▲ Actual harm, one-off · Aug 1, 2024 · 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: Jul 29, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
All citations in the current public record (33)
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not run an ongoing quality assurance committee that reviews care problems and creates plans to fix them. |
| Dec 19, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not serve food and drinks that were appetizing, attractive, and at a safe and pleasant temperature. · from a complaint |
| Dec 19, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Aug 1, 2024 | ▲ 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 |
| May 15, 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. |
| May 15, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
| May 15, 2024 | 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. |
| May 15, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. · from a complaint |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide the care needed to maintain or improve residents' movement and flexibility — such as range-of-motion exercises — leading to avoidable decline. |
| May 15, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. |
| Apr 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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. · from a complaint |
| Apr 23, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Mar 12, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | 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 |
| Oct 17, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint |
| Oct 17, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not give residents the required written notice of their rights, the facility's rules, the services offered, and what those services cost. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · from a complaint |
| Sep 22, 2023 | 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 |
| Sep 22, 2023 | C · Minimal risk, facility-wide | The facility did not conduct and document a facility-wide assessment of what staff, supplies, and resources it needs to care for its residents properly — during everyday operations, nights, weekends, and emergencies. · from a complaint |
| Feb 2, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | 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. |
| Feb 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. |
| Feb 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. |
| Feb 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Feb 2, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The 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. |
| Feb 2, 2023 | 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. |
| Feb 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. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (9 → 3).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 15 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 15 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 3 | 0 | D |
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)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
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) | 4.00 | 4.83 | 3.95 | bottom 16% in Minnesota; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.77 | 1.22 | 0.69 | bottom 10% in Minnesota; top 30% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.47 | 4.27 | 3.50 | bottom 12% in Minnesota; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.32 | 0.69 | 0.48 | bottom 8% in Minnesota; bottom 37% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 46.9 | 42.2 | 45.8 | bottom 33% in Minnesota; bottom 45% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 25.0 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 27% in Minnesota; top 20% in the U.S. |
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 3.90, RN 0.75, weekend 3.38. Staffing rating: 4/5.
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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stesel, Maxim | Individual | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 07/07/2016 |
| Rice, Pamela | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/01/2017 |
| Smith, Marlene | Individual | W-2 Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 09/07/2016 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "What written notices do we get before any transfer or discharge, and what is your bed-hold policy?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "How does your quality committee work, and can you give an example of a problem it recently identified and fixed?"
- "Could I join residents for a meal to see the food quality and temperature for myself?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
- "Can we tour the resident rooms, bathrooms, and common areas today, including areas not on the usual tour route?"
- "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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| St Benedicts Care Center | 0.5 mi | Saint Cloud, MN | ★★★★☆ | 4/5 | |
| Sterling Park Health Care Center | 4.3 mi | Waite Park, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Good Shepherd Lutheran Home | 4.4 mi | Sauk Rapids, MN | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Country Manor Healthcare and Rehab Center | 5.6 mi | Sartell, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| The Gardens at Foley LLC | 12.8 mi | Foley, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Assumption Home | 16.2 mi | Cold Spring, MN | ★★★★★ | 3/5 | |
| Annandale Care Center INC | 19.5 mi | Annandale, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
All facilities in Saint Cloud →
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245438.