Catholic Eldercare on Main
Minneapolis, Minnesota · CCN 245439
26 surveys since 2011, 7 of them producing a finding at harm level or worse.
Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.
- Citations on record
- 123
- Surveys
- 26
- Harm or worse
- 7
- Immediate jeopardy
- 2
Findings at the most serious level CMS records.
Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.
The facility
- Certified beds
- 164
- Ownership
- Non profit - Corporation
- Chain
- Independent
- County
- Hennepin
- Medicare-certified since
- 1987
CMS ratings
- Overall
- 3
- Health inspection
- 2
- Staffing
- 5
- Quality measures
- 4
CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.
Compared with similar facilities
Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat more weighted findings than its peer group.
Weighted by harm level, against 17 not-for-profit facilities with 128 or more beds in Minnesota.
Last survey on record
Dec 18, 2025
326 days ago.
Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.
Staffing
| Measure | This facility | Peer median |
|---|---|---|
| Nurse hours per resident day | 4.18 | 4.70 |
| Registered-nurse hours per resident day | 1.11 | — |
| Annual nurse turnover | 20.0% | 30.8% |
As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.
Enforcement
- Fines
- $24,713 across 1 penalty
Federal civil money penalties and remedies as CMS currently publishes them. Amounts may still be under appeal.
Severity of recent findings
| Severity | Isolated | Pattern | Widespread |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immediate jeopardy | J13.1% | K— | L— |
| Actual harm | G— | H— | I— |
| No harm, potential for more than minimal | D2475.0% | E618.8% | F13.1% |
| No harm, potential for minimal | A— | B— | C— |
Most frequently cited here
In CMS’s current monthly file.
- F5522×
Ensure that residents are fully informed and understand their health status, care and treatments.
- F5582×
Reasonably accommodate the needs and preferences of each resident.
- F5842×
Honor the resident's right to a safe, clean, comfortable and homelike environment, including but not limited to receiving treatment and supports for daily living safely.
- F6562×
Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.
- F6842×
Provide appropriate treatment and care according to orders, resident’s preferences and goals.
In the surveyor’s words
From the most serious findings on record at Catholic Eldercare on Main, in the surveyor’s own words.
- Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF689Oct 18, 2024
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to comprehensively reassess and, if needed, develop interventions with unsupervised eating to reduce the risk of accidental choking or asphyxiation for 1 of 1 resident (R67) who ate unsupervised in their room and had two documented episodes of choking. This constituted an immediate jeopardy (IJ) situation for R67. The IJ began on 9/14/24 when R67 choked for a second time on oral food, and the facility failed to comprehensively reassess R67's risk of choking, implement any interventions for increased supervision while eating or safe swallowing (i.e., speech therapy), or reeducate R67 and her responsible party on the risks of choking if R67 remained eating unsupervised as she had been despite choking. […]
- Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF684Sep 29, 2021
Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure staff obtained a blood pressure or provided a full assessment to identify a change in condition for 1 of 2 residents (R1) reviewed for quality of care. R1 had a change in condition that staff were monitoring on [DATE]; however, when staff attempted to obtain a blood pressure with a machine on three different occasions, the machine did not register the resident's blood pressure due to movement and staff did not attempt an alternative to obtain a blood pressure. The survey resulted in immediate jeopardy (IJ) to resident safety as R1 was sent to the hospital on [DATE] and died . The IJ began on [DATE]. The administrator and director of nursing (DON) were notified of the IJ on [DATE], at 12:59 p.m. […]
- Actual harm, isolatedF580Sep 29, 2021
Based on interview and document review, the failed to timely notify the physician of a change of condition for 1 of 2 residents (R1) reviewed for change of condition. R1 was unable to swallow her food, staring blankly, had an increase in pulse rate. The following shift R1 had a decrease in pulse rate, and on both shifts staff were unable to obtain a blood pressure. R1 sustained harm as required emergency services and expired at the hospital. Findings include: R1's facesheet printed on [DATE], noted R1 had diagnoses [MEDICAL RECORD OR PHYSICIAN ORDER] . R1's admission Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], noted R1 had poor cognition and required extensive assistance with dressing, bed mobility, and was totally dependent on staff for transfers. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF880Oct 18, 2024
Based on observation, interview, and document review the facility failed to ensure residents clothing was covered during storage and delivery to the residents. The uncovered linen had the potential to affect all residents. Findings include: During observation and interview on 10/14/24 at 1:13 p.m. laundry aide (H)-C was observed pushing a large metal uncovered laundry cart down a resident hallway on the first floor containing various cleaned resident clothing items. H-C stated she had worked at the facility as a laundry aide for a long time and they had never covered the personal laundry carts. During observation and interview on 10/15/24 at 1:28 p.m. H-A verified she was delivering cleaned personal linen on the second floor in an uncovered cart. […]
- No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF880Aug 18, 2022
Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to implement the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance for individualized transmission-based precautions including the use, handling, and disposal of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), and failed to provide isolation precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19 for two of two residents who were positive for COVID-19 (R144, R77). This had the potential to affect all residents and staff who were at risk of infection, or re-infection, from COVID-19 and all 155 residents due to potentially related staff illness. Further, the facility failed to ensure food was protected from pathogens during transportation to residents from the kitchen. […]
Read 26 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 26 of 123 on record.
Every survey on record
FindingsAt actual harm or above
- Dec 18, 2025Standard12 findings
- Oct 18, 2024Standard7 findings · 1 harm
- Feb 23, 2024Complaint4 findings
- Nov 16, 2023Standard9 findings
- Mar 28, 2023Complaint2 findings
- Jan 26, 2023Complaint1 finding
- Aug 18, 2022Standard6 findings
- Apr 20, 2022Complaint1 finding
Show the 18 earlier surveys
- Nov 18, 2021Complaint3 findings
- Sep 29, 2021Complaint2 findings · 2 harm
- May 20, 2021Complaint2 findings
- Jan 11, 2021Complaint2 findings
- Dec 10, 2020Complaint1 finding
- Oct 8, 2020Standard6 findings
- Jun 22, 2020Infection control1 finding
- Feb 6, 2020Complaint1 finding
- Aug 16, 2019Standard and complaint12 findings
- Jun 14, 2018Standard2 findings
- May 18, 2017Standard7 findings
- Apr 8, 2016Standard8 findings
- Mar 5, 2015Standard9 findings
- Dec 13, 2013—9 findings
- Sep 25, 2013—2 findings · 1 harm
- Feb 14, 2013—10 findings · 1 harm
- Dec 7, 2011—2 findings
- Feb 11, 2011—2 findings · 2 harm
Surveys that found no deficiencies are not in CMS’s files and do not appear here.
Comparable facilities
The nearest facilities to this one in the same peer group, by weighted findings.
Deficiency Index is independent and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or approved by CMS, Medicare, or any government agency. About this data · Report a correction