Minnesota ›Farmington

Trinity Care Center

Costs & paymentPlan a visit

905 Elm Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (opens Google Maps) · Dakota County · (651) 463-7818· 80 certified beds · avg 68 residents/day · certified since Jul 20, 1982 · 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: ST. FRANCIS HEALTH SERVICES (14 facilities, chain avg rating 2.8★)

3/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
inspected Apr 30, 2026
2
Serious findings on record
most recent Dec 9, 2025
$0
Fines, last 3 years
6.22
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: ★★★☆☆3/5 · CMS overall rating: 5/5 · 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 9, 2025 · 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: Nov 29, 2025 (Past Non-Compliance)

▲ Actual harm, isolated · Jul 11, 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: Jul 5, 2024 (Past Non-Compliance)

Inspection findings in the public record

Showing the latest 3 of 14 inspection findings. Open the full record below to read every finding.

  1. D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolated

    The facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. F-0580

  2. 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

  3. 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

View all 14 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
Apr 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe facility did not immediately notify the resident, their doctor, and a family member when something significant happened — such as an injury, a decline in health, or a room change. Families and doctors are entitled to know right away. · F-0580
Apr 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Apr 30, 2026D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Dec 9, 2025▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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
May 14, 2025D · 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
May 14, 2025D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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. · F-0761
Jul 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe 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
Jul 24, 2024E · Potential for more than minimal harm, patternThe facility did not develop and follow policies and procedures for offering residents flu and pneumonia vaccinations. · F-0883
Jul 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 24, 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
Jul 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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
Jul 24, 2024D · Potential for more than minimal harm, isolatedThe 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. · F-0695
Jul 11, 2024▲ G · Actual harm, isolatedThe 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

Inspection trend by year

Citations from standard inspections increased between the last two inspection cycles (2 → 3).

Citations by recorded inspection yearPublished citation counts, not a quality score · Source: CMS, 2026-08-01
All citationsSerious citations (G–L)
2024
All citations: 8
Serious citations (G–L): 1
2025
All citations: 3
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
202481G ▲
202531G ▲
202630D

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: 6.22
Minnesota average: 4.83
U.S. average: 3.95
Registered Nurse hours
This facility: 1.20
Minnesota average: 1.22
U.S. average: 0.69
Weekend total nurse staffing
This facility: 5.52
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)6.224.833.95top 7% in Minnesota; top 3% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours1.201.220.69top 43% in Minnesota; top 10% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing5.524.273.50top 7% in Minnesota; top 3% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.520.690.48bottom 39% in Minnesota; top 31% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)19.842.245.8top 4% in Minnesota; top 3% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)0.038.642.9top 1% in Minnesota; top 1% 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 5.11, RN 0.98, weekend 4.53.Comparing with Medicare Care Compare? Care Compare shows the raw figure (5.11 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: 5/5 · long-stay residents: 5/5 · 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 Trinity Care Center. 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
Bach, CurtisIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE08/28/2024
Bach, CurtisIndividualCorporate OfficerNOT APPLICABLE08/28/2024
Bach, CurtisIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE08/28/2024
Bach, CurtisIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE08/28/2024
Big Stone Therapies, INCOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/03/2015
Big Stone Therapies, INCOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/22/2025
Bisel, RobinIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE02/24/2025
Bisel, RobinIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE02/24/2025
Caspers, MeganIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE12/29/2014
Caspers, MeganIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE12/29/2014
Dripps, DanielIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2016
Dripps, DanielIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2016
Dripps, DanielIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2016
Dripps, DanielIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2016
Ehlers, DouglasIndividualManaging Control - Governing BodyNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Ehlers, DouglasIndividualCorporate DirectorNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Ehlers, DouglasIndividualOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Ehlers, DouglasIndividualADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE01/01/2023
Eide Bailly LLPOrganizationOperational/Managerial ControlNOT APPLICABLE01/03/2023
Eide Bailly LLPOrganizationADP of the SNFNOT APPLICABLE10/22/2025

Showing 20 of 109 parties CMS has on file for this facility; 89 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 St. Francis Health Services — 14 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 13 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 is your falls rate, and what specific steps do you take to prevent falls and supervise residents at risk?"
  • "If my family member falls or their condition changes, exactly when and how will I be notified?"
  • "How do you make sure resident assessments are completed and submitted to the state on time?"
  • "Who is on the team that builds each resident's care plan, and how quickly is it in place after admission?"
  • "Can you show me an example care plan, and how are families included when it's created and updated?"
  • "Who leads your infection prevention program, and how do you make sure staff follow practices like hand hygiene every day?"
  • "Can you show me how medications are stored and secured on the units, including controlled drugs?"
  • "What percentage of your residents and staff are vaccinated against flu and pneumonia, and how do you offer the vaccines?"

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 20% total nursing staff turnover here — who on the care team has been with you longest?"
  • "The ownership record on file lists 109 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 27 within 20 miles)

FacilityDistanceCityOverallInspectionFlags
Apple Valley Village Health Care Center7.8 miApple Valley, MN★★★★★4/5
Ebenezer Ridges Geriatric Care Center10.5 miBurnsville, MN★★★★☆4/5
Three Links Care Center12.8 miNorthfield, MN★★★★☆3/5
Martin Luther Care Center14.1 miBloomington, MN★★☆☆☆1/5
Augustana Care Hastings Health and Rehabilitation14.5 miHastings, MN★★★★★4/5
Regina Senior Living14.6 miHastings, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Minnesota Masonic Home Care Center15.3 miBloomington, MN★★★★★4/5
Norris Square15.4 miCottage Grove, MN★★★★★4/5
The Estates at Bloomington LLC15.4 miBloomington, MN★★★☆☆3/5
Presbyterian Homes of Bloomington15.5 miBloomington, MN★★★★★4/5
Woodlyn Heights Healthcare Center15.9 miInver Grove Heights, MN★★☆☆☆2/5
Good Samaritan Society - Inver Grove Heights16.7 miInver Grove Heights, MN★★★☆☆3/5

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

Other facilities in the same county

CMS records place this facility in Dakota, MN — 9 certified facilities there. These are outside the 20-mile list above, or far enough down it not to appear.

Listed by facility name — not a ranking. Homes already in the table above are not repeated here.

All facilities in Farmington →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245250.

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