How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Harmony Gardens
1438 County Road C East, Maplewood, MN 55109 (opens Google Maps) · Ramsey County · (651) 488-6658· 64 certified beds · avg 60 residents/day · certified since Dec 1, 1986 · 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: CASSIA (16 facilities, chain avg rating 4.4★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Mar 26, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Sep 19, 2024
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.93
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)
Every record stays on this page.
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 4/5 · 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)
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 19, 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.
▲ Actual harm, isolated · Sep 19, 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): 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: Sep 18, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 23 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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. F-0812
The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. F-0604
The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. F-0640
View all 23 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.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Mar 26, 2026 | F · Potential for more than minimal harm, widespread | 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. · F-0812 |
| Mar 26, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility used physical restraints — devices that limit a resident's movement — when they weren't needed for medical treatment. · F-0604 |
| Mar 26, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not enter each resident's assessment information into the required format and send it to the state within 7 days of completing the assessment, as the rules require. · F-0640 |
| Mar 26, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. · from a complaint · F-0641 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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. · from a complaint · F-0700 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0609 |
| Apr 4, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | 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 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0550 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0554 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0676 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0686 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0688 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide appropriate care related to bladder and bowel needs — including care for residents who use catheters and steps to prevent urinary tract infections. · F-0690 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · F-0692 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail. · F-0698 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide each resident with a nourishing, tasty, well-balanced diet that meets their daily nutritional and special dietary needs. · F-0800 |
| Sep 19, 2024 | ▲ G · Actual harm, isolated | 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 · F-0689 |
| Jan 5, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide basic life support, such as CPR, before emergency medical help arrived — care that's required when it matches the doctor's orders and the resident's own written wishes. · from a complaint · F-0678 |
| Nov 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
| Nov 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs. · from a complaint · F-0584 |
| Nov 9, 2023 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (10 → 4).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 2
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 4
Serious citations (G–L): 0
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 3 | 0 | D |
| 2024 | 2 | 1 | G ▲ |
| 2025 | 14 | 0 | F |
| 2026 | 4 | 0 | F |
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)
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
What these staffing numbers mean →
This facilityMinnesota averageU.S. average
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)
This facility: 4.93
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.49
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.46
Minnesota average: 4.27
U.S. average: 3.50
All bars start at zero. Exact values and supporting details remain below.
| Measure | This facility | Minnesota avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 4.93 | 4.83 | 3.95 | top 43% in Minnesota; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.49 | 1.22 | 0.69 | top 21% in Minnesota; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 4.46 | 4.27 | 3.50 | top 38% in Minnesota; top 13% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 1.06 | 0.69 | 0.48 | top 14% in Minnesota; top 5% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 24.7 | 42.2 | 45.8 | top 10% in Minnesota; top 7% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 15.8 | 38.6 | 42.9 | top 12% in Minnesota; top 9% 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 4.64, RN 1.40, weekend 4.21.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.64 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: 4/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 5/5
Costs & payment
Price evidence · separate from quality
No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Harmony Gardens. 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 / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cassia | Organization | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 100% | 01/01/2020 |
| Elim Care INC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 100% | 10/25/1995 |
| Addington, Jon | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Aderinkomi, Michael | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2025 |
| Albrecht, Michael | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/05/1998 |
| Almsted, Kris | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/15/2025 |
| Baldwin, James | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 12/28/1998 |
| Brady, Jaime | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Brady, Jaime | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Brady, Jaime | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Brown, Angela | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Brown, Angela | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Cassia | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2018 |
| Cassia | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/05/2026 |
| Kern, Matthew | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Libbon, Paul | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Libbon, Paul | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Libbon, Paul | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Mason, Krissa | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Mason, Krissa | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
Showing 20 of 34 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 14 are not displayed. The full list is in the CMS Ownership dataset.
Other facilities in the same chain
CMS lists this facility under the chain Cassia — 16 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.
- Haven Homes of Maple Plain — Maple Plain, MN · overall 5/5
- Lake Ridge Care Center of Buffalo, INC. — Buffalo, MN · overall 4/5
- Lakeside Generations Health Care Center — Dassel, MN · overall 4/5
- Milaca Elim Meadows Health Care Center — Milaca, MN · overall 5/5
- Park View Health Care Center — Buffalo, MN · overall 5/5
- Redeemer Health Care Center — Minneapolis, MN · overall 5/5
- Baptist Health & Rehab — Bismarck, ND · overall 4/5
- Fargo Elim Health Care Center — Fargo, ND · overall 3/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 15 others, continuing from this facility's own place in that list.
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 did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your policy on physical restraints, and what alternatives do you try first?"
- "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
- "How do you care for residents with incontinence or catheters, and what do you do to prevent urinary tract infections?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "What alternatives do you try before using bed rails, and how do you involve families in that decision?"
- "When abuse or theft is suspected, who do you notify, how fast, and how do you inform the family?"
Also worth asking anywhere
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the plan of correction for the findings in your most recent state inspection?"
- "CMS reports 25% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 34 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 88 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maplewood Rehabilitation Center | 1.1 mi | Maplewood, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Good Samaritan Society - Maplewood | 2.4 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Cerenity Care Center White Bear Lake | 4.3 mi | White Bear Lake, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Estates at Roseville LLC | 4.9 mi | Roseville, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| The Villas at Roseville | 5.1 mi | Roseville, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Cerenity Marian of St Paul LLC | 5.2 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Capital View Transitional Care Center | 5.3 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| Langton Shores | 5.4 mi | Roseville, MN | ★★★★★ | 5/5 | |
| The Villas at St Paul | 5.8 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Ebenezer Integrated Care & Rehab | 5.8 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| The Emeralds at St Paul LLC | 6.3 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Little Sisters of the Poor | 6.4 mi | Saint Paul, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 2/5 |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Ramsey, MN — 28 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- Hayes Residence — Saint Paul, MN · overall 2/5
- Highland Chateau Health and Rehabilitation Center — Saint Paul, MN · overall —/5SFF
- Lyngblomsten Care Center — Saint Paul, MN · overall 3/5
- New Brighton Care Center — New Brighton, MN · overall 2/5
- Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills — Arden Hills, MN · overall 4/5
Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245381.