How to file a complaint about care →
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
The Villas at Richfield
7727 Portland Avenue South, Richfield, MN 55423 (opens Google Maps) · Hennepin County · (763) 762-1800· 105 certified beds · avg 93 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1987 · 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: MONARCH HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT (45 facilities, chain avg rating 2.2★)
3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected May 20, 2026
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.90
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: 3/5 · 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.
Inspection findings in the public record
Showing the latest 3 of 36 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.
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
The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. F-0561
The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. F-0583
View all 36 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 |
|---|---|---|
| May 20, 2026 | 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 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not honor residents' right to make their own choices about their daily lives, such as when to wake up, what to eat, or how to spend their time. · F-0561 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' personal and medical information private and confidential. · F-0583 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not help a resident get vision and hearing services — such as eye exams, glasses, hearing tests, or hearing aids. · F-0685 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. · F-0689 |
| May 20, 2026 | 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 |
| May 20, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| May 15, 2026 | D · Potential for more than minimal 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 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0656 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. · F-0679 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide treatment and care that follows the doctor's orders and matches the resident's own preferences and goals. · F-0684 |
| Jun 26, 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 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not provide safe and appropriate pain management for a resident who needed it. · F-0697 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0699 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not keep residents' medications free from unnecessary drugs. Residents should only take medicines they truly need, at the right dose, for a clear reason. · F-0757 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. · F-0842 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Jun 26, 2025 | 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 |
| Mar 12, 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 |
| Mar 12, 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 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility transferred or discharged a resident without a valid reason, or failed to provide the required documentation and information when moving a resident out. · from a complaint · F-0622 |
| Mar 12, 2025 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 · F-0684 |
| Nov 18, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · from a complaint · F-0657 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | 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. · F-0584 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The 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. · F-0657 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · F-0677 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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 |
| Aug 21, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | The facility did not have a working call system — the button or cord residents use to summon help — in each resident's bathroom and bathing area. · F-0919 |
| May 31, 2024 | 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. · from a complaint · F-0550 |
| May 31, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Mar 11, 2024 | D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated | 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. · from a complaint · F-0695 |
| Nov 27, 2023 | E · Potential for more than minimal harm, pattern | 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 · F-0656 |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (10 → 8).
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2023
All citations: 1
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2024
All citations: 12
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2025
All citations: 14
Serious citations (G–L): 0
2026
All citations: 9
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 | 1 | 0 | E |
| 2024 | 12 | 0 | E |
| 2025 | 14 | 0 | D |
| 2026 | 9 | 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)
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: 3.90
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.04
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 3.56
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) | 3.90 | 4.83 | 3.95 | bottom 12% in Minnesota; top 44% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 1.04 | 1.22 | 0.69 | bottom 40% in Minnesota; top 14% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 3.56 | 4.27 | 3.50 | bottom 17% in Minnesota; top 39% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.57 | 0.69 | 0.48 | bottom 47% in Minnesota; top 25% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 28.4 | 42.2 | 45.8 | top 18% in Minnesota; top 12% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 36.4 | 38.6 | 42.9 | bottom 50% in Minnesota; top 40% 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 3.27, RN 0.87, weekend 2.98.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (3.27 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 The Villas at Richfield. 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 →
For profit - Limited Liability company
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Halpert, Marc | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 32% | 01/01/2023 |
| Jaffa, Noam | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 16% | 01/01/2023 |
| Legum, Joshua | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 26% | 01/01/2023 |
| Nij LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 16% | 01/01/2023 |
| Spartan Healthcare LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 32% | 01/01/2023 |
| Stern, William | Individual | 5% or Greater Indirect Ownership Interest | 26% | 01/01/2023 |
| WBS Holdings LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 26% | 01/01/2023 |
| Yazoma Holdings, LLC | Organization | 5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest | 26% | 01/01/2023 |
| Halpert, Marc | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Halpert, Marc | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Jaffa, Noam | Individual | Corporate Director | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Legum, Joshua | Individual | Contracted Managing Employee | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Monarch Healthcare Operating Xii LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
| Stern, William | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 01/01/2023 |
All 14 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 Monarch Healthcare Management — 45 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.
- The Villas at Robbinsdale — Robbinsdale, MN · overall 1/5
- The Villas at Roseville — Roseville, MN · overall 3/5
- The Villas at St Louis Park — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 2/5
- The Villas at St Paul — Saint Paul, MN · overall 2/5
- The Villas at the Cedars — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 1/5
- The Villas at the Park — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 2/5
- The Waterview Pines LLC — Virginia, MN · overall 1/5
- The Waterview Shores LLC — Two Harbors, MN · overall 1/5
Listed by state, then facility name — not a ranking. Showing 8 of the 44 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.
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "What choices do residents have over their daily schedule, like meal times, bathing, and activities?"
- "How do you protect residents' privacy, both in their medical records and in day-to-day care?"
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "How do you arrange eye and hearing care for residents, including appointments and equipment like glasses or hearing aids?"
- "What is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
- "How do you monitor residents' weight and eating, and what happens when someone starts losing weight?"
- "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
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 28% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
- "The ownership record on file lists 14 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 96 within 20 miles)
| Facility | Distance | City | Overall | Inspection | Flags |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Estates at Bloomington LLC | 1.9 mi | Bloomington, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Martin Luther Care Center | 2.8 mi | Bloomington, MN | ★★☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Mount Olivet Careview Home | 2.9 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Mount Olivet Home | 2.9 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Edenbrook of Edina | 3.1 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| Presbyterian Homes of Bloomington | 3.4 mi | Bloomington, MN | ★★★★★ | 4/5 | |
| Aurora on France | 3.4 mi | Edina, MN | ★★★★☆ | 3/5 | |
| Grand Avenue Rest Home | 4.6 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 2/5 | |
| MN Veterans Home-Mpls | 4.6 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★★★☆☆ | 3/5 | |
| Lakehouse Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center | 5.1 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Providence Place | 5.2 mi | Minneapolis, MN | ★☆☆☆☆ | 1/5 | |
| Highland Chateau Health and Rehabilitation Center | 5.8 mi | Saint Paul, MN | —/5 | SFF |
Compare this facility with the 3 closest →
Other facilities in the same county
CMS records place this facility in Hennepin, MN — 54 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.
- The Villas at Robbinsdale — Robbinsdale, MN · overall 1/5
- The Villas at St Louis Park — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 2/5
- The Villas at the Cedars — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 1/5
- The Villas at the Park — Saint Louis Park, MN · overall 2/5
- Victory Health and Rehabilitation Center — Minneapolis, MN · overall 2/5
- Villas at Bryn Mawr LLC — Minneapolis, MN · overall 1/5abuseSFF
- Woodlake Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center — Crystal, MN · overall 3/5
- Allina Health Restorative Suites — Plymouth, MN · overall 5/5
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 245492.