What is The Villas at Roseville's Medicare star rating?

CMS rates The Villas at Roseville 3 out of 5 stars overall, with 3 for health inspections, 4 for staffing and 3 for quality measures (CMS data as of September 1, 2026).

How many deficiencies did The Villas at Roseville get at its last inspection?

6 health deficiencies at the standard inspection on April 30, 2026. The Minnesota average is 7.1.

Does The Villas at Roseville accept Medicaid?

It is certified to take Medicaid (CMS lists it as "Medicare and Medicaid"). Certification does not mean a Medicaid bed is open: ask the admissions office.

Who owns The Villas at Roseville?

CMS lists 14 owners and managers, and links the home to Monarch Healthcare Management. Legal business name: VILLAS AT ROSEVILLE LLC.

The Villas at Roseville: Inspections, Staffing & Ratings

The record in brief

At its most recent standard inspection, on April 30, 2026, inspectors cited 6 health deficiencies (the Minnesota average is 7.1, the national average 9.2).

Of 19 health citations since December 2023, 2 were rated as actual harm or immediate jeopardy to residents (2 immediate jeopardy).

CMS lists 2 fines totaling $24,791 in the last three years; the largest was $17,345, and the latest is dated March 5, 2025.

Nurses and nurse aides worked 3.29 hours per resident per day, against 4.19 across Minnesota and 3.86 nationally. Registered nurses accounted for 0.85 of those hours.

41.0% of nursing staff left within the year CMS measured (Minnesota average 42.2%).

CMS links it to Monarch Healthcare Management, an affiliated group of 45 nursing homes.

Health inspections

Federal rules call for a standard inspection at least every 15 months, plus a visit whenever a complaint is filed. Each mark below is one citation, colored by how serious inspectors rated it. How to read a citation.

Under each citation, the quoted text is the inspector's own summary from the federal statement of deficiencies (CMS form 2567), word for word apart from a privacy scrub; CMS removes residents' and staff names before it publishes the text. The full notes are on Medicare.gov.

212/23

112/23

103/24

203/25

603/25

111/25

604/26

Potential for minimal harm Potential for more than minimal harm Actual harm Immediate jeopardy Found on a complaint visit

Where its citations fall on CMS's grid

CMS rates every citation by how much harm it caused (rows) and how many residents it touched (columns). The count in each box is this home's, across all 19 health citations on file.

Severity

Isolated

Pattern

Widespread

Immediate jeopardy

Actual harm

Potential for more than minimal harm

15D

Potential for minimal harm

April 30, 2026Standard inspection, Complaint inspection · 6 citations

F

Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician.

F801 · Nutrition and Dietary · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, widespread · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to employ either a full-time registered dietician (RD) or a qualified dietary manager (DM) to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service since January of 2020, which had the potential to affect all 54 residents who resided in the facility.
D

Ensure that each resident is free from the use of physical restraints, unless needed for medical treatment.

F604 · Freedom from Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure freedom of movement was not restricted when a pillow was placed adjacent to the resident's body, underneath the fitted sheet which could not be removed easily by the resident for 1 of 1 resident (R44) reviewed for potential restraints.
D

Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.

F657 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to provide care conferences for 1 of 1 resident (R53) reviewed for care conferences.
D

Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services.

F685 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure recommended provider referral for ophthalmology care was followed up on for 1 of 1 resident (R21) reviewed for missed appointments.
D

Provide the appropriate treatment and services to a resident who displays or is diagnosed with mental disorder or psychosocial adjustment difficulty, or who has a history of trauma and/or post-traumatic stress disorder.

F742 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · found on a complaint visit · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure coordination of mental health care services for 1 of 1 residents (R4) who had a referral to obtain psychiatrist services.
D

Provide or obtain dental services for each resident.

F791 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) June 4, 2026

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure emergency dental referral for infected tooth was followed up on for 1 of 1 resident (R21) reviewed for dental services.

November 20, 2025Complaint inspection · 1 citation

D

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

F656 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · found on a complaint visit · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) December 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and record review the facility failed to develop a comprehensive care plan for one of four residents (R1) reviewed when R1's care plan did not include her foley catheter daily care needs.

March 12, 2025Standard inspection · 6 citations

D

Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.

F641 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to accurately code the Minimum Data Set (MDS) for 2 of 2 residents (R40) reviewed for pressure ulcers, and (R15) reviewed for psychotropic medications.
D

PASARR screening for Mental disorders or Intellectual Disabilities

F645 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure a Level 1 Pre-admission Screening (PAS) and, if needed, a a Level II Pre-admission Screening and Resident Review (PASARR) were completed, retained in the medical record, and readily available to ensure continuity of care with mental health needs for 1 of 1 resident (R1) reviewed for PASARR.
D

Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals.

F657 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review the facility failed to ensure care conferences were completed in a timely manner for 1 of 1 resident (R14) reviewed for care planning.
D

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

F686 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and document review, the facility failed to ensure and identify accurate wound care assessments for 1 of 1 resident (R40) reviewed for pressure ulcers.
D

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

F689 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to demonstrate safe patient handling to reduce the risk for accidents for 1 of 1 residents (R13) reviewed for safety with mechanical lift assisted transfers.
D

Develop and implement policies and procedures for flu and pneumonia vaccinations.

F883 · Infection Control · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 16, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure 1 of the 5 residents (R1) reviewed for immunizations was offered and/or provided the pneumococcal vaccination series as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to help reduce the risk of associated infection(s).

March 5, 2025Complaint inspection · 2 citations

J

Ensure that residents are free from significant medication errors.

F760 · Pharmacy Service · Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety, isolated · found on a complaint visit · Past noncompliance: already fixed when inspectors found it

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure residents received the medications ordered by the provider for 1 out of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for significant medication errors, which resulted in hospitalization in the intensive care unit (ICU). This resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R1 when the facility omitted her apixaban (medication that decreases clotting ability of blood) for six days, for a total of 12 doses, R1 had a stroke and was sent to the hospital. The facility implemented corrective action prior to the investigation so the deficiency was issued at Past Noncompliance. The IJ began on 2/18/25 at 4:00 p.m., when R1 missed her first dose of apixaban (Eliquis). The director of nursing (DON), administrator, social worker, and corporate clinical nurse were notified of the IJ on 3/5/25 at 11:50 a.m. [...]
C

Post nurse staffing information every day.

F732 · Nursing and Physician Services · No actual harm, potential for minimal harm, widespread · found on a complaint visit · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) April 9, 2025

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure required nurse staff information was posted on a daily basis. This had the potential to affect all 58 residents residing in the facility and visitors who may wish to view the information.

March 22, 2024Complaint inspection · 1 citation

D

Try different approaches before using a bed rail. If a bed rail is needed, the facility must (1) assess a resident for safety risk; (2) review these risks and benefits with the resident/representative; (3) get informed consent; and (4) Correctly install and maintain the bed rail.

F700 · Quality of Life and Care · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · found on a complaint visit · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) May 7, 2024

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to comprehensively assess residents for the use of bedrails prior to the installation of bed rails for 2 of 4 residents (R2 and R3) and/or review the risk/benefits and obtain written informed consent prior the use of bed rails.

December 28, 2023Complaint inspection · 1 citation

D

Ensure each resident receives an accurate assessment.

F641 · Resident Assessment and Care Planning · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · found on a complaint visit · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) January 2, 2024

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review the facility failed to ensure the completed Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessment was accurately coded to reflect cognition and mood for 2 of 3 residents (R1 and R2) reviewed for MDS accuracy. Findings Include: R1's optional state MDS dated [DATE], indicated R1 was admitted on [DATE] with diagnoses of cancer, anemia and adult failure to thrive. The assessments for sections for 'C'-Cognitive patterns and 'D'-Mood were blank and not completed in accordance with Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI). During an observation and interview on 12/27/23, at 8:57 a.m. R1 was seated in a wheelchair at a dining room table. R1 stated, I am here because I can't take care of myself anymore at home and I need assistance with basic things now due to my cancer. During an interview on 12/27/23, at 12:05 p.m. [...]

December 14, 2023Standard inspection · 2 citations

J

Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive.

F578 · Resident Rights · Immediate jeopardy to resident health or safety, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) January 3, 2024

Inspectors wroteBased on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure resident specific advanced directive orders were accurately reflected throughout the medical record for 1 of 3 residents (R13) reviewed for advanced directives. This resulted in an immediate jeopardy (IJ) for R13 who would have been denied cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) contrary to their wishes, in the absence of a pulse or respirations. The IJ began on [DATE] when R13's Provider Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) identified R13 had an active order to administer CPR, however, the physician orders indicated R13 was do-not-resuscitate (DNR). The administrator was notified of the IJ on [DATE], at 3:15 p.m. The IJ was removed on [DATE], at 11:00 a.m., but non-compliance remained at the lower scope and severity level of D, isolated with no actual harm but potential to cause more than minimal harm. [...]
D

Honor the resident's right to a dignified existence, self-determination, communication, and to exercise his or her rights.

F550 · Resident Rights · No actual harm, potential for more than minimal harm, isolated · Corrected (the home has a date of correction) January 3, 2024

Inspectors wroteBased on observation, interview and document review, the facility failed to provide laundry services in a manner that promoted dignity for 1 of 2 residents (R28) reviewed for dignity concerns.

Fire safety inspections

4 fire safety citations on file: 1 on April 30, 2026, 3 on December 14, 2023.

Every fire safety citation4 citations

E
Inspect, test, and maintain automatic sprinkler systems.

K 353 · April 30, 2026 · Corrected (the home has a date of correction)
F
Conduct testing and exercise requirements.

E 39 · December 14, 2023 · Corrected (the home has a date of correction)
F
Ensure heating and ventilation systems that have been properly installed according to the manufacturer's instructions.

K 521 · December 14, 2023 · Corrected (the home has a date of correction)
D
Ensure that special areas are constructed so that walls can resist fire for one hour or have an approved fire extinguishing system.

K 321 · December 14, 2023 · Corrected (the home has a date of correction)

Fines and payment denials

Date	Penalty	Amount or length
March 5, 2025	Fine	$17,345
December 14, 2023	Fine	$7,446

A payment denial means Medicare and Medicaid stopped paying for new admissions for that period.

Staffing

Hours of care per resident per day, from the payroll records every home sends CMS. Higher means more staff time with each resident.

Measure	This home	Minnesota	United States
All nursing staff (RN, LPN and aides)	3.29	4.19	3.86
Registered nurses	0.85	1.06	0.69
All nursing staff on weekends	2.95	3.71	3.42
Nurse aides	1.91
Licensed practical nurses	0.53
Nursing staff turnover (share who left in a year)	41.0%	42.2%	45.8%
Registered nurse turnover	30.8%	38.6%	42.9%
Administrators who left	1

CMS expects 3.01 hours a day for residents as sick as this home's (its case-mix figure). The staffing star compares the two.

Staffing by quarter, from daily payroll records

Every nursing home sends CMS its staff hours for each day (the Payroll Based Journal). Here they are added up by quarter. The latest quarter is the one behind the figures above. In January to March 2026, nursing staff hours per resident were 3.43 on weekdays and 2.95 on weekends, 14% lower on weekends (nationally, weekends ran 15% lower). Contract or agency staff worked 9.7% of nursing hours, against 5.3% nationally. Total nursing hours per resident went from 3.30 in April to June 2025 to 3.29 in January to March 2026.

Quarter	All nursing staff	Registered nurses	Weekdays	Weekends	Contract staff share	Days with no RN hours	Residents a day
Jan to Mar 2026	3.29	0.85	3.43	2.95	9.7%	0 of 90	58
Oct to Dec 2025	3.32	0.81	3.41	3.08	10.3%	0 of 92	57
Jul to Sep 2025	3.28	0.72	3.45	2.88	10.4%	0 of 92	57
Apr to Jun 2025	3.30	0.72	3.44	2.96	14.2%	0 of 91	59
United States, Jan to Mar 2026	3.75	0.62	3.92	3.33	5.3%	0.5% of days
Minnesota, Jan to Mar 2026	4.19	1.05	4.38	3.73	5.2%	0.8% of days

Hours per resident per day: staff hours in the quarter divided by resident days (the daily census CMS derives from resident assessments). Registered nurses include the director of nursing and RNs with administrative duties; aides include nurse aides in training and medication aides, as in CMS's own staffing measure. How these are calculated.

Staff pay reports

Staff pay at this home

No staff pay figure for this home has passed review yet. A figure appears only after at least 5 reports from at least 3 different people, sent over at least 60 days, have passed review. If you work here, your report helps start one.

Official wage estimates for Minnesota

Job	Median	Middle half	Employed
Minnesota, all employers
CNAs (nursing assistants)	$22.44	$19.39 to $23.72	29,120
LPNs and LVNs	$30.65	$28.83 to $34.26	12,840
Registered nurses	$48.80	$42.76 to $55.17	70,110
United States, nursing care facilities
CNAs (nursing assistants)	$20.67	$17.91 to $22.55	534,270
LPNs and LVNs	$33.86	$30.05 to $37.40	188,210
Registered nurses	$41.11	$37.85 to $47.68	142,270

Hourly wages; the middle half runs from the 25th to the 75th percentile. Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics, May 2025. BLS has no separate estimate for medication aides. These are survey estimates for whole occupations, not figures for any one home.

How staff pay reports work · CNA pay by state

Quality measures

The measures CMS uses for the quality star. Lower is better for every one of them.

Measure	This home	Minnesota	US
Percentage of long-stay residents whose need for help with daily activities has increased Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	9.7	18.2	13.9
Percentage of long-stay residents with a catheter inserted and left in their bladder Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	0.5	1.9	0.8
Percentage of long-stay residents with a urinary tract infection Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	3.7	2.6	1.6
Percentage of long-stay residents experiencing one or more falls with major injury Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	3.7	4.0	3.2
Percentage of short-stay residents who newly received an antipsychotic medication Short Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	1.0	1.9	1.6
Percentage of long-stay residents whose ability to walk independently worsened Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	15.2	20.5	14.1
Percentage of long-stay residents with pressure ulcers Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	1.7	5.2	4.6
Percentage of long-stay residents who received an antipsychotic medication Long Stay residents, 2025Q2-2026Q1	11.5	17.1	15.4
Percentage of short-stay residents who were rehospitalized after a nursing home admission Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231	35.1	23.5	23.8
Percentage of short-stay residents who had an outpatient emergency department visit Short Stay residents, 20250101-20251231	12.1	14.8	12.0

Short-term rehab results

For a stay to recover after a hospital visit, these are the results CMS publishes for The Villas at Roseville's Medicare short-stay residents. On returning residents home or to the community, CMS rates it no different from the national rate (54.5% of residents, after adjusting for how sick they were). How to read these, and what Medicare pays for.

Went home or back to the community

54.5% this home

No different from the national rate

US median of homes 51.5% · Minnesota: 66 better, 14 worse

Rate of successful return to home or community from a SNF (risk-standardized discharge to community rate). Higher is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 62 eligible stays.

Potentially preventable readmissions

10.2% this home

No different from the national rate

US median of homes 10.7% · Minnesota: 0 better, 0 worse

Rate of potentially preventable hospital readmissions 30 days after discharge from a SNF (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2022 to September 2024. 67 eligible stays.

Infections that led to a hospital stay

6.8% this home

No different from the national rate

US median of homes 7.1% · Minnesota: 2 better, 0 worse

Percentage of infections residents got during their SNF stay that resulted in hospitalization (risk-standardized rate). Lower is better. October 2023 to September 2024. 36 eligible stays.

Self-care and mobility at discharge

50.0% this home

Median of homes: Minnesota57.8% · US 56.6%

Percentage of residents who are at or above an expected ability to care for themselves and move around at discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 26 residents counted.

Falls with major injury

0.0% this home

Median of homes: Minnesota0.0% · US 0.0%

Percentage of SNF residents who experience one or more falls with major injury during their SNF stay. Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 43 residents counted.

New or worsened pressure ulcers

2.0% this home

Median of homes: Minnesota2.0% · US 1.7%

Percentage of residents with pressure ulcers or pressure injuries that are new or worsened (adjusted rate). Lower is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 43 residents counted.

Medication list given at discharge

Not reported

CMS note: The number of residents or resident stays is too small to report. Call the facility to discuss this quality measure.

Median of homes: Minnesota98.5% · US 98.7%

Percentage of residents where the SNF provided a current medication list to the resident, family, and/or caregiver at final discharge. Higher is better. October 2024 to September 2025. 19 residents counted.

Source: CMS Skilled Nursing Facility Quality Reporting Program - Provider Data, released 2026-09-30. Better, no different and worse are CMS's own comparisons with the national rate, after adjusting for how sick residents were. Medians of homes and the state counts are worked out by us from the same file.

Owners and operators

Legal business name: VILLAS AT ROSEVILLE LLC. CMS links this home to Monarch Healthcare Management, a group of 45 nursing homes averaging 2.2 stars overall.

Name	Role	Type	Share	Since
Nij LLC	5% or greater direct ownership interest	Organization	16%	01/01/2023
Spartan Healthcare LLC	5% or greater direct ownership interest	Organization	32%	01/01/2023
Wbs Holdings LLC	5% or greater direct ownership interest	Organization	26%	01/01/2023
Yazoma Holdings, LLC	5% or greater direct ownership interest	Organization	26%	01/01/2023
Halpert, Marc	5% or greater indirect ownership interest	Individual	32%	01/01/2023
Jaffa, Noam	5% or greater indirect ownership interest	Individual	16%	01/01/2023
Legum, Joshua	5% or greater indirect ownership interest	Individual	26%	01/01/2023
Stern, William	5% or greater indirect ownership interest	Individual	26%	01/01/2023
Legum, Joshua	Contracted managing employee	Individual		01/01/2023
Jaffa, Noam	Corporate director	Individual		01/01/2023
Halpert, Marc	Corporate officer	Individual		01/01/2023
Stern, William	Corporate officer	Individual		01/01/2023
Monarch Healthcare Operating Xii LLC	Operational/managerial control	Organization		01/01/2023
Halpert, Marc	Operational/managerial control	Individual		01/01/2023

As listed in the CMS ownership file, which names owners with a 5% or greater stake and the people and companies with operational or managerial control.

Questions to ask on a visit

Chosen from this home's own inspection record.

When is the care plan meeting, and can family attend it?Inspectors cited 6 problems in this area, most recently on April 30, 2026: "Develop the complete care plan within 7 days of the comprehensive assessment; and prepared, reviewed, and revised by a team of health professionals."
How do you prevent falls and pressure injuries, and how are families told when one happens?Inspectors cited 6 problems in this area, most recently on April 30, 2026: "Assist a resident in gaining access to vision and hearing services."
How do residents and families raise a complaint or grievance, and how fast is it answered?Inspectors cited 2 problems in this area, most recently on December 14, 2023: "Honor the resident's right to request, refuse, and/or discontinue treatment, to participate in or refuse to participate in experimental research, and to formulate an advance directive."
Can we see a week of menus and the kitchen, and how are special diets handled?Inspectors cited 1 problem in this area, most recently on April 30, 2026: "Employ sufficient staff with the appropriate competencies and skills sets to carry out the functions of the food and nutrition service, including a qualified dietician."
Who is on the floor on Saturday and Sunday, and how many residents does each aide care for?Weekend nurse staffing here was 2.95 hours per resident per day, below the Minnesota average of 3.71.
How long has the current administrator been here?CMS counts 1 administrator who left in the period it measured.

Other nursing homes nearby

The Estates at Roseville LLC
Roseville, 0.8 mi · 2 of 5 stars · 30 citations
Langton Shores
Roseville, 1.7 mi · 5 of 5 stars · 2 citations
Lyngblomsten Care Center
Saint Paul, 2.4 mi · 3 of 5 stars · 20 citations
Presbyterian Homes of Arden Hills
Arden Hills, 2.6 mi · 4 of 5 stars · 22 citations
Good Samaritan Society - Maplewood
Saint Paul, 3.3 mi · 3 of 5 stars · 34 citations
St. Anthony Park Home Inc
Saint Paul, 3.3 mi · 3 of 5 stars · 43 citations
St. Anthony Health & Rehabilitation
St. Anthony, 3.8 mi · 4 of 5 stars · 32 citations
The Villas at New Brighton
New Brighton, 4.2 mi · 1 of 5 stars · 61 citations

Minnesota contacts for a concern about a nursing home

These are the official offices in Minnesota. NursingHomeClear cannot take or act on complaints.

Inspections and complaints: Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division, the state agency that inspects nursing homes for CMS and takes complaints about care.
Resident advocate: Minnesota Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care, 1-800-657-3591. The long-term care ombudsman is a free, confidential advocate for residents and families, set up under the federal Older Americans Act.
State inspection reports: MDH Nursing and Boarding Care Home Survey and Complaint Inspection Findings, where Minnesota publishes its own records on licensed homes.

Common questions

What is The Villas at Roseville's Medicare star rating?: CMS rates The Villas at Roseville 3 out of 5 stars overall, with 3 for health inspections, 4 for staffing and 3 for quality measures (CMS data as of September 1, 2026).
How many deficiencies did The Villas at Roseville get at its last inspection?: 6 health deficiencies at the standard inspection on April 30, 2026. The Minnesota average is 7.1.
Has The Villas at Roseville been fined?: Yes. CMS lists 2 fines totaling $24,791 in the last three years.
Does The Villas at Roseville accept Medicaid?: It is certified to take Medicaid (CMS lists it as "Medicare and Medicaid"). Certification does not mean a Medicaid bed is open: ask the admissions office.
Who owns The Villas at Roseville?: CMS lists 14 owners and managers, and links the home to Monarch Healthcare Management. Legal business name: VILLAS AT ROSEVILLE LLC.

Sources

Ratings, staffing and fines: CMS Provider Information, released September 30, 2026, data as of September 1, 2026.
Citations: CMS Health Deficiencies and Fire Safety Deficiencies.
Owners: CMS Ownership. Penalties: CMS Penalties.
Staffing by quarter: CMS Payroll Based Journal Daily Nurse Staffing, April 2025 to March 2026, summed by NursingHomeClear.
Inspector summaries: CMS Full Statement of Deficiencies (CMS-2567 text), data as of September 1, 2026. Each quote is the part of the statement before the detailed findings.
Inspection reports with the inspectors' full notes are on this home's Medicare.gov page.
Something wrong on this page? Ask for a correction. We fix errors in our copy of the data; findings themselves can only be changed by CMS and the state.
NursingHomeClear is independent and not affiliated with CMS, Medicare or any state agency. This page reports federal records; it does not rate, recommend or endorse any home, and it is not medical or legal advice.