MinnesotaSaint Louis Park

The Estates at St Louis Park LLC

3201 Virginia Avenue South, Saint Louis Park, MN 55426 · Hennepin County · 145 certified beds · avg 135 residents/day · certified since Mar 1, 1968

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

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
3
Serious findings on record
$107,139
Fines, last 3 years
4.22
Nurse hours/resident/day (adjusted)

What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)

Health inspection rating: ★★☆☆☆2/5 · 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)

▲ Immediate jeopardy, one-off · Oct 6, 2023 · 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 (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: Oct 30, 2023 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Jun 13, 2024 · 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: Jul 17, 2024 (Deficient, Provider has date of correction)

▲ Actual harm, one-off · Feb 29, 2024 · F-0684 · triggered by a complaint

The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals.

Why it matters: Care that strays from doctor's orders or ignores the resident's wishes can lead to declining health and avoidable harm.

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 22, 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.

DateSeverityWhat the facility was cited for
Aug 7, 2025E · 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.
Aug 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Aug 7, 2025D · 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.
Aug 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Aug 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Aug 7, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Jun 2, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not create and follow a basic care plan covering a new resident's most immediate needs within 48 hours of admission. The first days are when a new resident is most vulnerable. · from a complaint
Jun 2, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Apr 17, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 24, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Feb 5, 2025D · 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
Oct 22, 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. · from a complaint
Jun 13, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not provide a safe, clean, comfortable, and homelike environment, including safe support for residents' daily living needs.
Jun 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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 13, 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.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide safe, appropriate care for residents who need dialysis — the treatment that filters the blood when kidneys fail.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not have a licensed pharmacist review each resident's complete medication regimen and medical chart every month, or did not follow its own rules for reporting medication problems.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations.
Jun 13, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors. · from a complaint
Apr 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Apr 25, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Mar 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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
Feb 29, 2024▲ G · Actual 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. · from a complaint
Jan 11, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Oct 6, 2023▲ J · Immediate jeopardy, 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 6, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
May 4, 2023E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not keep its building and grounds safe, functional, clean, and comfortable for residents, staff, and visitors.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 4, 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.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids.
May 4, 2023D · 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.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
May 4, 2023D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not provide or arrange dental services for its residents. Nursing homes are responsible for making sure residents can get dental care.
May 4, 2023C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.
May 4, 2023C · Minimal risk, facility-wideThe 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.

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections decreased between the last two inspection cycles (17 → 6).

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2023131J ▲
2024232G ▲
2025110E

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)

3 fines totaling $107,139.

DateTypeAmount / length
Jun 13, 2024Fine$50,141
Feb 29, 2024Fine$41,074
Oct 6, 2023Fine$15,924

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)4.224.833.95bottom 25% in Minnesota; top 31% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.361.220.69top 28% in Minnesota; top 6% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing3.904.273.50bottom 35% in Minnesota; top 26% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.920.690.48top 20% in Minnesota; top 8% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)25.542.245.8top 11% in Minnesota; top 8% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)23.138.642.9top 25% in Minnesota; top 18% 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 3.37, RN 1.09, weekend 3.11. Staffing rating: 5/5.

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: 2/5 · long-stay residents: 4/5 · short-stay residents: 1/5

Who owns this facility

Non profit - Corporation

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Arem, JeffreyIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest7%10/01/2017
Halpert, MarcIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest30%10/01/2017
Jaffa, NoamIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest7%10/01/2017
Legum, JoshuaIndividual5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest30%10/01/2017
Nij LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest7%10/01/2017
Spartan Healthcare LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%10/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest20%10/01/2017
Yazoma Holdings, LLCOrganization5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest30%10/01/2017
Halpert, MarcIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2017
Legum, JoshuaIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2017
Monarch Healthcare Operating IV LLCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2017
Stern, WilliamIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE10/01/2017

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
The Villas at the Cedars0.5 miSaint Louis Park, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Sholom Home West0.7 miSaint Louis Park, MN★★★★★4/5
The Villas at St Louis Park1.2 miSaint Louis Park, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Chapel View Health Care Center1.6 miHopkins, MN★★★★☆3/5
The Villas at the Park1.9 miSaint Louis Park, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Hopkins Restorative Care Center2.5 miHopkins, MN★☆☆☆☆2/5
The Villas at Brookview2.8 miGolden Valley, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Jones Harrison Residence2.8 miMinneapolis, MN★★★☆☆2/5
Covenant Living of Golden Valley Care & Rehab Ctr3.8 miGolden Valley, MN★★★★★5/5
Good Samaritan Ambassador4.3 miNew Hope, MN★★★★★5/5
Villas at Bryn Mawr LLC4.3 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Lakehouse Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center4.6 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Saint Louis Park →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245148.