MinnesotaMinneapolis

Victory Health and Rehabilitation Center

512 49th Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN 55430 · Hennepin County · 79 certified beds · avg 70 residents/day · certified since Jan 1, 1991

2/5
Health inspection rating (on-site)
0
Serious findings on record
$0
Fines, last 3 years
3.52
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: 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.

All citations in the current public record (25)

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
Jun 2, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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
Jun 2, 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. · from a complaint
Jan 15, 2026F · Potential for harm, facility-wideThe 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 15, 2026E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe facility did not let a resident help develop and carry out their own plan of care — the written roadmap of the services and support they'll receive, built around their personal goals and preferences.
Jan 15, 2026D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not make sure residents were fully informed about their own health, care, and treatments in a way they could understand.
Jan 15, 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.
Dec 3, 2025D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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. · from a complaint
Dec 3, 2025D · 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). · from a complaint
Dec 2, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Dec 2, 2025D · 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
Dec 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
Sep 8, 2025D · 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
Sep 8, 2025D · 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. · from a complaint
Dec 19, 2024D · 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.
Dec 19, 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.
Dec 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe 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.
Dec 19, 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.
Dec 19, 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.
Dec 19, 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.
Dec 19, 2024D · Potential for harm, one-offThe facility did not properly run its feeding assistant program — assessing which residents are appropriate for it, following each resident's care plan, and making sure feeding assistants are trained and supervised. Feeding assistants are trained helpers who assist residents at mealtimes.
Jun 13, 2024F · 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.
Jun 13, 2024E · Potential for harm, repeatedThe 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, 2024D · 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.
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 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.

Inspection trend by year

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

YearCitationsSerious (G–L)Worst severity that year
2024120F
202570D
202660F

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)3.524.833.95bottom 4% in Minnesota; bottom 38% in the U.S.
Registered Nurse hours0.431.220.69bottom 2% in Minnesota; bottom 27% in the U.S.
Weekend total nurse staffing2.854.273.50bottom 2% in Minnesota; bottom 23% in the U.S.
Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted)0.210.690.48bottom 2% in Minnesota; bottom 15% in the U.S.
Total nursing staff turnover (%)40.742.245.8bottom 48% in Minnesota; top 38% in the U.S.
RN turnover (%)77.838.642.9bottom 6% in Minnesota; bottom 7% 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 3.10, RN 0.38, weekend 2.50. Staffing rating: 2/5.

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: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5

Who owns this facility

For profit - Limited Liability company

Owner / managerTypeRoleStakeSince
Sherman, IsraelIndividual5% or Greater Direct Ownership Interest100%03/01/2019
De Costa, DennisIndividualW-2 Managing EmployeeNOT APPLICABLE09/26/2019

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 Estates at Fridley LLC1.9 miFridley, MN★★☆☆☆2/5abuse
Bywood East Health Care2.1 miMinneapolis, MN★★☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF
Crest View Lutheran Home2.5 miColumbia Heights, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5abuse
Good Samaritan Society - Specialty Care Community2.6 miRobbinsdale, MN★★☆☆☆1/5
The Villas at Robbinsdale3.0 miRobbinsdale, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5
Benedictine Health Center Innsbruck3.5 miNew Brighton, MN★★★☆☆2/5
The Terrace at Crystal LLC3.5 miCrystal, MN—/5SFF
Catholic Eldercare on Main3.5 miMinneapolis, MN★★★☆☆2/5
St Anthony Health & Rehabilitation3.7 miSt Anthony, MN★★★★☆3/5
Courage Kenny Rehabilitation Institutes TRP3.7 miGolden Valley, MN★★★★☆2/5
Maranatha Care Center4.0 miBrooklyn Center, MN★★★★☆4/5
Villas at Bryn Mawr LLC4.6 miMinneapolis, MN★☆☆☆☆1/5abuseSFF

Compare this facility with the 3 closest →

All facilities in Minneapolis →

Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 245544.