Deficiency Index

The Villas at St Paul

Saint Paul, Minnesota · CCN 245340

30 surveys since 2011. The first finding at harm level was recorded in 2018.

Data as of , released by CMS on October 8, 2026. Source: CMS Provider Data Catalog.

Citations on record
132
Surveys
30
Harm or worse
4
Immediate jeopardyall corrected before survey
2
The record, 2011–2026
’11’15’20’25’26
No harm recordedHarm or worseNot surveyed
Immediate jeopardy2

Findings at the most serious level CMS records. All were recorded as past non-compliance — corrected before the survey.

Beyond CMS’s monthly file21/30

Older surveys no longer in CMS’s monthly file or on Care Compare. They are shown here.

The facility

Certified beds
105
Ownership
For profit - Corporation
Chain
MONARCH HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT
County
Ramsey
Medicare-certified since
1986

CMS ratings

Overall
2
Health inspection
2
Staffing
4
Quality measures
3

CMS’s own Five-Star ratings.

Compared with similar facilities

Since 2021, this facility recorded somewhat fewer weighted findings than its peer group.

Weighted by harm level, against 30 facilities of 100–127 beds in Minnesota.

Last survey on record

Jun 26, 2026

136 days ago.

Counts surveys with at least one finding. A clean survey leaves no record here, so the real gap may be shorter.

Staffing

MeasureThis facilityPeer median
Nurse hours per resident day3.213.47
Registered-nurse hours per resident day0.91—
Annual nurse turnover48.1%37.2%

As reported by the facility to CMS, beside the peer-group median.

Enforcement

Fines
$15,940 across 1 penalty

Federal civil money penalties and remedies as CMS currently publishes them. Amounts may still be under appeal.

Severity of recent findings

Citations by CMS scope and severity. Rows are harm level, columns are how widespread the finding was.
SeverityIsolatedPatternWidespread
Immediate jeopardyJ12.2%K—L—
Actual harmG—H—I—
No harm, potential for more than minimalD3984.8%E510.9%F12.2%
No harm, potential for minimalA—B—C—
CMS’s current file: 46 of the 132 citations on record.

Most frequently cited here

In CMS’s current monthly file.

  • F6093×

    Timely report suspected abuse, neglect, or theft and report the results of the investigation to proper authorities.

  • F6563×

    Develop and implement a complete care plan that meets all the resident's needs, with timetables and actions that can be measured.

  • F6863×

    Provide appropriate pressure ulcer care and prevent new ulcers from developing.

  • F6893×

    Ensure that a nursing home area is free from accident hazards and provides adequate supervision to prevent accidents.

  • F8803×

    Provide and implement an infection prevention and control program.

In the surveyor’s words

From the most serious findings on record at The Villas at St Paul, in the surveyor’s own words.

  • Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF689Jun 26, 2026

    Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to provide adequate supervision to prevent elopement for 1 of 1 residents (R37) who was reviewed for elopement. This resulted in Immediate Jeopardy (IJ) for R37 when she left the facility and was found approximately 4.5 miles away at her previous home by neighbors, which placed R37 at likelihood for serious harm or death. The IJ began on 8/30/25, when R37 exited the building without staff awareness. An unknown culinary staff had witnessed R37 outside and informed registered nurse (RN)-A who searched and was unable to find R37. […]

  • Immediate jeopardy, isolatedF600Apr 12, 2021

    Based on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to protect residents from physical and verbal abuse for 2 of 3 residents (R5, R6) reviewed for abuse. This deficient practice resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) when R4 hit R5 in the face while he lay in bed and later attacked R5 who fell out of his wheelchair, and verbally abused R6. The IJ began on 4/5/21, at approximately 11:24 p.m. when R4 punched R5 in the face; threatened to kill R6 and attacked R5, who fell out of his wheelchair. After the incident, R5 and R6 left to smoke and R4 was allowed in the smoking area with both R5 and R6 without any staff supervision. R5 was scared and asked R6 to protect him from R4 when R4 then verbally threatened R6 again. […]

  • Actual harm, isolatedF689Jan 7, 2021

    Based on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure the safe use of hot packs and/or rice packs for 1 of 1 residents (R1) who sustained [CONDITION(S)] and required total assistance from staff for activities of daily living. This failure resulted in actual harm when R1 sustained a thermal [CONDITION(S)] to the right hand and required debridement for second degree [CONDITION(S)]. Findings include: R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment dated [DATE], identified R1 had medically complex condition that included [CONDITION(S)] (paralysis from a spinal cord injury which involves the arms, hands trunk, legs and pelvic organs). The MDS also indicated R1 had intact cognition. R1 had rejected cares less than daily (4-6 days in the look-back period). […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF880Mar 4, 2025

    Based on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to follow infection control guidelines to ensure beard nets were worn by staff who prepared food in the kitchen. This practice had the potential to affect all the residents, staff, and visitors who ate food prepared in the kitchen. Findings include: During an observation on 3/4/25 at 12:41 p.m., cook (CK)-A was observed working in the kitchen where food was being prepared by other staff. CK-A had a full beard, was not wearing a beard net and walked by where the food was being prepared. CK-A stated he worked preparing food on 3/4/25 and 3/5/25, without a beard net because the facility was out of them. CK-A stated he knew he was supposed to wear a beard net to prevent hair from getting into the food. […]

  • No harm, potential for more than minimal, widespreadF886May 20, 2022

    Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to implement a system of surveillance to identify infection of agency staff during a COVID-19 outbreak for 4 of 4 agency staff reviewed (licensed practical nurse (LPN)-A, registered nurse (RN)-A, RN-B, RN-C). The agency staff providing direct care were not included in the facility wide testing, prior to the beginning of their shift, during a significant COVID-19 outbreak. Findings include: An email communication from the administrator on 5/19/22, at 3:42 p.m. noted the outbreak began on 5/5/22, when a staff member tested positive for COVID-19, another staff member was COVID-19 positive on 5/8/22, and three more tested positive on 5/9/22. […]

Read 23 findings in full →The most serious and the most recent: 23 of 132 on record.

Every survey on record

FindingsAt actual harm or above

  • Jun 26, 2026Standard10 findings · 1 harm
  • Apr 1, 2026Complaint3 findings
  • Apr 3, 2025Standard3 findings
  • Mar 28, 2025Complaint2 findings
  • Mar 4, 2025Complaint2 findings
  • Sep 23, 2024Complaint4 findings
  • Jul 23, 2024Complaint1 finding
  • Jun 27, 2024Standard and complaint9 findings
Show the 22 earlier surveys
  • Mar 16, 2023Standard12 findings
  • May 20, 2022Complaint2 findings
  • Jan 18, 2022Complaint2 findings
  • Nov 23, 2021Complaint1 finding
  • Oct 27, 2021Complaint3 findings
  • Sep 2, 2021Standard3 findings
  • Aug 10, 2021Complaint1 finding
  • Apr 12, 2021Complaint2 findings · 1 harm
  • Jan 7, 2021Complaint1 finding · 1 harm
  • Nov 13, 2020Complaint1 finding
  • May 8, 2020Infection control1 finding
  • Apr 5, 2019Standard and complaint21 findings
  • Jun 7, 2018Standard9 findings · 1 harm
  • Aug 3, 2017Standard1 finding
  • Jul 31, 2017Complaint2 findings
  • Aug 4, 2016Standard9 findings
  • Jul 30, 2015Standard3 findings
  • Jun 12, 2014Standard8 findings
  • Aug 15, 2013—8 findings
  • Jun 14, 2012—6 findings
  • Aug 4, 2011—1 finding
  • Jan 14, 2011—1 finding

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