MinnesotaRush City

The Estates at Rush City LLC

650 Bremer Avenue South, Rush City, MN 55069 · Chisago County · 41 certified beds · avg 29 residents/day · certified since Jul 1, 1986

Part of chain: MONARCH HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT (45 facilities, chain avg rating 2.2★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
1
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
4.25
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: 2/5

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 · Sep 6, 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: Oct 1, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

All citations in the current public record (21)

CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Jan 29, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. · from a complaint
Jan 29, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Jan 29, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Jan 29, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility gave residents unnecessary mind-altering (psychotropic) medications, or used drugs in a way that restrained residents by dulling their ability to think, move, or function.
Jan 29, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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).
Jan 29, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Jan 29, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls.
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not make sure its nurses and nurse aides had the skills and training needed to properly care for every resident. · from a complaint
Dec 5, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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.
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 5, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility's medication error rate was 5 percent or higher — meaning too many doses were given incorrectly, such as the wrong drug, dose, or time.
Sep 6, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Sep 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Sep 6, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide enough food and fluids to keep residents healthy, such as preventing unplanned weight loss or dehydration. · from a complaint
Jul 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · from a complaint
Oct 26, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not give residents reasonable access to and privacy in using ways to communicate, such as phones, mail, and email. Residents have the right to stay in touch with the outside world privately.
Oct 26, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards.
Oct 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives.
Oct 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.
Oct 26, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (4 → 7).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
202350E
202491G ▲
202670F

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)

MeasureThis facilityMinnesota avgU.S. avgWhere it stands
Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day)4.254.833.95bottom 27% in Minnesota; top 31% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.541.220.69top 19% in Minnesota; top 4% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.814.273.50bottom 30% in Minnesota; top 29% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.870.690.48top 22% in Minnesota; top 9% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)72.042.245.8bottom 6% in Minnesota; bottom 5% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)75.038.642.9bottom 7% in Minnesota; bottom 9% 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 3.78, RN 1.38, weekend 3.39. 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: 1/5 · long-stay residents: 1/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Partnership

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Arem, JeffreyIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest7%03/01/2017
Halpert, MarcIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest30%03/01/2017
Jaffa, NoamIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%03/01/2017
Legum, JoshuaIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest30%03/01/2017
Nij LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest7%03/01/2017
Spartan Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%03/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest20%03/01/2017
Yazoma Holdings, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%03/01/2017
Halpert, MarcIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2017
Legum, JoshuaIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2017
Monarch Healthcare Operating IV LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE03/01/2017

Questions to ask on your visit

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

Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Ecumen North Branch12.4 miNorth Branch, MN★★★☆☆3/5
Burnett Medical Center14.7 miGrantsburg, WI★★★☆☆3/5
Gracepointe Crossing Gables15.6 miCambridge, MN★★★★★3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Rush City →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245348.