Not rated by CMS — ratings are suppressed for new or low-volume facilities.
The next survey window likely opens around January 2027
Estimate from public CMS data, current as of June 2026. Survey timing is at the state agency's discretion.
Citation history
Health deficiencies cited at Minnesota Masonic Home Care Center during CMS and state inspections, most recent first.
A facility failed to consistently implement and accurately track care-planned interventions for a resident on hemodialysis with a fluid restriction. The resident, with moderate cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions, was found with multiple cups of fluid in her room, and neither she nor her family knew how much fluid was being given or tracked. Interviews with staff revealed inconsistencies in fluid intake tracking, and a review of records showed missing or inaccurate data. The resident was later hospitalized and found to be dehydrated, underscoring the facility's failure to monitor fluid intake properly.
The facility failed to follow physician orders for a resident with a cervical collar and did not notify the provider of the resident's refusal to wear it. Additionally, the facility did not implement an individualized bowel management protocol for another resident, leading to delays in addressing constipation. Staff interviews revealed inconsistencies in following protocols, and the director of nursing acknowledged the deficiencies.
A resident with a complex medical history, including diabetes and peripheral vascular disease, developed a pressure ulcer on the left heel. The facility failed to consistently perform and document weekly wound assessments and measurements, missing several dates. The wound care nurse was responsible for these assessments, but due to an error in order entry and occasional lapses in documentation, the assessments were not completed as required. The facility's policy for weekly assessments and interdisciplinary collaboration was not consistently followed.
Failure to Monitor and Track Fluid Intake for Dialysis Resident
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to ensure that care-planned interventions for maintaining appropriate fluid balance were consistently implemented and accurately tracked for a resident receiving hemodialysis and on a fluid restriction. The resident, who had moderate cognitive impairment and multiple medical conditions including end-stage renal disease, was observed with multiple cups of fluid in her room, despite being on a 1500 ml fluid restriction. The resident and her family member were unsure of how much fluid was being given or tracked, indicating a lack of communication and monitoring by the facility staff. Nursing staff, including a nursing assistant and a licensed practical nurse, were interviewed and revealed inconsistencies in the tracking and recording of the resident's fluid intake. The nursing assistant mentioned that fluid intake should be charted every shift, but was unsure who monitored the totals to ensure the resident did not exceed her fluid restriction. The licensed practical nurse confirmed that both the point of care (POC) system and the Treatment Administration Record (TAR) should be used to track fluid intake every shift, but acknowledged that there was a lack of communication between the nurse and nursing assistants. A review of the resident's POC Response History and TAR revealed multiple instances of missing or inaccurately recorded fluid intake data. Several days lacked evidence of fluid intake being recorded for every shift, and the totals recorded in the TAR did not match the data in the POC. The registered nurse unit manager confirmed these discrepancies and acknowledged the importance of accurate and consistent tracking of the resident's fluid intake to prevent exceeding the fluid restriction. The resident was found to be dehydrated during a hospitalization for another reason, highlighting the impact of the facility's failure to properly monitor and manage the resident's fluid intake.
Failure to Follow Physician Orders and Bowel Management Protocol
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to adhere to physician orders and notify the provider regarding a resident's refusal to wear a cervical collar. Resident R88, who had a posterior displaced type II dens fracture, Alzheimer's disease, and dementia, was observed multiple times without the cervical collar, which was supposed to be worn at all times according to the care plan and provider orders. Despite the resident's frequent removal of the collar, staff did not consistently replace it or notify the hospice team or provider of the refusal. Interviews with various staff members, including registered nurses and the director of nursing, confirmed that the resident's refusal was known but not documented or communicated to the appropriate parties. Additionally, the facility did not implement and reassess an individualized bowel management protocol for Resident R60, who was reviewed for constipation. R60, who was cognitively intact and had a history of slow transit constipation, experienced significant delays in receiving appropriate interventions for constipation. The resident's bowel records indicated multiple instances where the bowel management protocol was not activated after the resident did not have a bowel movement for the specified number of shifts. Interviews with nursing staff revealed inconsistencies in following the bowel management protocol, and the director of nursing acknowledged that the protocol was not followed as required. The facility's failure to follow physician orders and notify the provider of refusals, as well as the lack of adherence to the bowel management protocol, resulted in deficiencies in the care provided to the residents. The lack of documentation and communication regarding the residents' conditions and refusals contributed to the deficiencies observed during the survey.
Failure to Consistently Assess and Document Pressure Ulcers
Penalty
Summary
The facility failed to comprehensively assess and document the wounds of a resident, identified as R52, who was at high risk for pressure ulcers. R52 had a complex medical history, including type 2 diabetes mellitus with neuropathy, osteomyelitis, and peripheral vascular disease, which contributed to the development of a pressure ulcer on the left heel. Despite being cognitively intact and dependent on staff for various activities, the facility did not consistently perform weekly wound assessments and measurements as required. Several dates were missing from the records, indicating a lapse in the monitoring and documentation process. Interviews with the nursing staff revealed that the wound care nurse was primarily responsible for conducting these assessments, but in her absence, the responsibility was supposed to be delegated to other nursing staff. However, due to an error in entering orders, these assessments were not completed on several occasions. The wound care manager admitted to occasionally forgetting to document the assessments, and the director of nursing confirmed that these assessments should have been completed weekly. The facility's policy required comprehensive weekly assessments and collaboration among the interdisciplinary team, which was not consistently followed in this case.
What surveyors are citing around you — mapped
All 10 risk areas, ranked with evidence
Repeat citations, what's rising near you, and quality measures — ranked so department heads know exactly where to look first.
Illustrative
What surveyors actually found near you
We read the 813 citations issued within 25 miles in the last 12 months — including the 24 immediate-jeopardy cases — and tell you exactly what happened, in plain English, matched to your record.
Resident with a documented fall history left unattended on the patio; found on the ground with a hip fracture.
Walk-in cooler logs missing for 12 days; expired supplements in the medication room fridge.
Illustrative
A prioritized, do-first checklist
Every risk area becomes concrete audit steps drawn from real citations at facilities like yours — run them this week, before your window opens.
Illustrative
Risk indicators are statistical estimates from public CMS data — not predictions, findings, or compliance advice.
Nursing homes near Bloomington
How nearby facilities compare on the same public inspection record.
| Facility | Distance | Overall rating | Citations, 12 mo | Serious (J–L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Presbyterian Homes Of Bloomington | 2.7 mi | — | 1 | 0 |
| The Estates At Bloomington Llc | 4.4 mi | — | 12 | 0 |
| Friendship Village Of Bloomington | 4.5 mi | — | 13 | 0 |
| Ebenezer Ridges Geriatric Care Center | 4.8 mi | — | 4 | 0 |
| Martin Luther Care Center | 4.9 mi | — | 0 | 0 |
Every risk area ranked, a do-first checklist, and your local survey patterns
Built specifically for Minnesota Masonic Home Care Center.
100% money-back within 48 hours.
Trusted data, never guesswork. Every citation, penalty, rating and Plan of Correction on this page is sourced from public CMS records (latest release August 2026) and official state health department websites.