Minnesota ›Buffalo

Lake Ridge Care Center of Buffalo, INC.

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

310 Lake Boulevard, Buffalo, MN 55313 (opens Google Maps) · Wright County · (763) 404-4603· 56 certified beds · avg 51 residents/day · certified since Feb 1, 1988 · 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★)

4/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Jan 8, 2026
1
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 6, 2024
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.49
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: ★★★★☆4/5 · 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 · Dec 6, 2024 · F-0760 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication.

Why it matters: A serious medication error can cause real harm, hospitalization, or worse.

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: Jan 7, 2025 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 9 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. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    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. F-0558

  3. C · Potential for minimal harm, widespread

    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. F-0577

View all 9 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
Jan 8, 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
Jan 8, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0558
Jan 8, 2026C · Potential for minimal harm, widespreadThe 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. · F-0577
Dec 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe facility did not keep residents free from significant medication errors — such as giving the wrong drug, the wrong dose, or missing a critical medication. · from a complaint · F-0760
Dec 6, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. · F-0644
Dec 6, 2024D · 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
Dec 6, 2024D · 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. · F-0684
Dec 6, 2024D · 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. · F-0689
Oct 18, 2023D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (5 → 3).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 5
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2026
All citations: 3
Serious citations (G–L): 0

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202310D
202451G ▲
202630F

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 →

No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.

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: 4.49
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.14
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 4.02
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)4.494.833.95bottom 37% in Minnesota; top 23% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.141.220.69top 48% in Minnesota; top 11% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing4.024.273.50bottom 40% in Minnesota; top 22% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.680.690.48top 40% in Minnesota; top 17% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)48.342.245.8bottom 31% in Minnesota; bottom 41% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)38.938.642.9bottom 46% in Minnesota; top 45% 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 4.38, RN 1.11, weekend 3.92.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (4.38 here, displayed there as hours and minutes), not the adjusted one above. Both are correct; they answer different questions. Staffing rating: 4/5.

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: 5/5 · short-stay residents: 2/5

Costs & payment

Price evidence · separate from quality

No verified facility-specific private-pay price is available in our data for Lake Ridge Care Center of Buffalo, INC.. 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
Elim Care INCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%01/29/1986
CassiaOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2020
Dahl, RobertIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/05/2003
Kern, MatthewIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE02/28/2019
Leff, WilliamIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/20/2004
Nelson, JasonIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE05/02/2011
Nye, GeraldIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE06/13/2019
Peterson, RolandIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE11/14/2013
Tangedahl, GuyIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE05/17/2012
Youngquist, KathrynIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE12/05/2003

All 10 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 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.

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

Full visit checklist →

Print visit checklist

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

  • "What systems do you use to prevent medication errors, and what happens when one occurs?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can you give me examples of how you adjust daily routines and room setups to fit each resident's preferences?"
  • "Where do you post your latest state inspection results and the ombudsman's contact information?"
  • "How do you identify and arrange specialized services for residents with mental health conditions or disabilities?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "How do you make sure each resident's care follows the doctor's orders, and what changed after this citation?"
  • "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"

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 48% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "Can I visit again unannounced, at a mealtime or on a weekend?"

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Park View Health Care Center0.7 miBuffalo, MN★★★★★5/5
The Estates at Delano LLC10.1 miDelano, MN★★★★☆4/5
Cura of Monticello10.1 miMonticello, MN★★☆☆☆3/5
Good Samaritan Society - Howard Lake12.4 miHoward Lake, MN★★★★☆3/5
Annandale Care Center INC13.1 miAnnandale, MN★★★★★5/5
Haven Homes of Maple Plain15.4 miMaple Plain, MN★★★★★5/5
The Gardens at Winsted LLC16.3 miWinsted, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Cokato Manor16.7 miCokato, MN★★★★★4/5
Guardian Angels Care Center18.1 miElk River, MN★★☆☆☆2/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Buffalo →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245513.

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