MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY

56 OUTER DRIVE, SILVER BAY, MN 55614 (218) 353-8700
Government - State 54 Beds Independent Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
85/100
#56 of 337 in MN
Last Inspection: March 2025

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Families considering Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay can find it reassuring that the facility has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is recommended and above average. It ranks #56 out of 337 facilities in Minnesota, placing it in the top half, and is #1 of 2 in Lake County, indicating it is the best option available locally. The facility is new and has not shown any trend data yet, but it has a strong staffing rating of 5 out of 5 stars and a turnover rate of 35%, which is below the state average, suggesting staff stability and familiarity with residents. Notably, there have been no fines reported, which is a positive sign of compliance, and the RN coverage is better than 88% of similar facilities, allowing for better oversight of patient care. However, there was a serious incident where a resident did not receive the correct medication, resulting in health complications that required emergency monitoring; this highlights the need for vigilance in medication administration despite the overall strengths of the home.

Trust Score
B+
85/100
In Minnesota
#56/337
Top 16%
Safety Record
Moderate
Needs review
Inspections
Too New
0 → 1 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
35% turnover. Near Minnesota's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Minnesota facilities.
Skilled Nurses
✓ Good
Each resident gets 107 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — more than 97% of Minnesota nursing homes. RNs are the most trained staff who catch health problems before they become serious.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 1 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★★
5.0
Overall Rating
★★★★★
5.0
Staff Levels
★★★★★
5.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
: 0 issues
2025: 1 issues

The Good

  • 5-Star Staffing Rating · Excellent nurse staffing levels
  • 5-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (35%)

    13 points below Minnesota average of 48%

Facility shows strength in staffing levels, quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 35%

11pts below Minnesota avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

The Ugly 1 deficiencies on record

1 actual harm
Jan 2025 1 deficiency 1 Harm
SERIOUS (G) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Actual Harm - a resident was hurt due to facility failures

Deficiency F0760 (Tag F0760)

A resident was harmed · This affected 1 resident

**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered to the correct resident for ...

Read full inspector narrative →
**NOTE- TERMS IN BRACKETS HAVE BEEN EDITED TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY** Based on interview and document review, the facility failed to ensure medications were administered to the correct resident for 1 of 3 residents (R1) reviewed for medication errors. This failure resulted in actual harm for R1 when she developed bradycardia (abnormally slow heart rate) and became hypotensive (abnormally low blood pressure) which required ongoing monitoring in the emergency department (ED). The facility had implemented appropriate corrective action prior to the onsite investigation, so the deficiency is being cited at past non-compliance. Findings include: R1's quarterly Minimum Data Set (MDS) dated [DATE], indicated R1 had intact cognition, and had diagnoses of chronic kidney disease stage 3b (moderate to severe loss of kidney function), hypertension (high blood pressure), heart failure (heart muscle does not pump blood effectively), hyponatremia (low blood sodium), anemia (low red blood cells), and polymyalgia rheumatica (inflammatory disorder that causes muscle pain and stiffness) . A facility report to the State Agency (SA) on 1/7/25 indicated on 1/6/25 at 7:45 a.m. R1 received another resident's medications, and had been sent to the hospital. On 1/6/25 at 9:14 a.m., a progress note written by nurse practitioner (NP)-A, indicated R1 had symptomatic hypotension and bradycardia following a medication error. R1 reported severe dizziness. Order written for evaluation and treatment at the ED. R1's Weights and Vitals Summary dated 1/6/25, indicated R1 had a blood pressure of 67/40 and pulse was 47 at 9:14 a.m. At 9:39 a.m. R1's blood pressure was 61/40 and her pulse was 41 bpm. R1's Emergency Department Note dated 1/6/25, indicated R1 was given the following medications the morning of 1/6/25: acetaminophen 650 milligrams (mg), apixaban (blood thinner) 5 mg , carvedilol (heart medication) 25 mg, divalproex sodium (seizure medication) 125 mg, furosemide (diuretic) 40 mg, metformin (diabetic medication) 1000 mg, sacubitril-valsartan (heart medication) 97-103 mg, allopurinol (uric acid reducer) 100 mg, amlodipine (blood pressure medication) 100 mg, empagliflozin (diabetic medication) 10 mg, ferrous sulfate (iron) 234 mg, isosorbide mononitrate extended release (heart medication) 60 mg, paroxetine (antidepressant) 20 mg, tamsulosin (prostate medication) 0.4 mg, and zinc sulfate 220 mg. R1's hospital History and Physical Summary dated 1/6/25, indicated R1 was accidentally given the wrong medications on the morning of 1/6/25. R1 had the following symptoms: lightheadedness, weakness, hypotension, and sinus bradycardia with rate in the mid to upper 40s. Poison control was contacted and didn't have further recommendations other than monitoring R1's blood pressure and heart rate. R1 was placed on telemetry, vital signs were completed every 2 hours, intravenous (IV) therapy was started with normal saline at 100 cubic centimeters per hours (cc/hr). Creatinine level (indicates how well the kidneys are functioning) was within baseline at 1.6 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL). Hemoglobin (a protein in red blood cells) was stable at 9.4 grams per deciliter (g/dL). Orders were placed to recheck hemoglobin on 1/7/25. Electrolytes were within normal limits. On 1/14/25 at 11:52 a.m., R1 stated on 1/6/25 in the morning, she was told by staff that she got the wrong medications. R1 stated she felt dizzy and weak in her legs a few hours after taking the wrong medications. R1 stated she had to go to the hospital overnight because she was not feeling well. On 1/15/25 at 8:46 a.m., registered nurse (RN)-A stated on 1/6/25 during the morning medications pass, she set up three different residents' medication in the medication room, and placed them on a tray. She took the tray and went into R1's room to give R1 her medications. She gave R1 the wrong medications, but did not realize until she went to the second resident's room and his medications were not on the tray, but R1's medications were still on the tray. She went and told the charge nurse right away. The charge nurse then took over caring for R1. RN-A was removed from passing medications to being a nursing assistant for the day. During her lunch, she was told she needed to leave the facility pending investigation, and has not been back to the facility since the incident. She had since been re-educated, and was now aware that pre-preparing medications was not an acceptable practice, and she would not be doing it in the future. On 1/15/25 at 9:56 a.m., consultant pharmacist (P)-A stated after she reviewed the medications R1 received in error, she was concerned about R1's blood pressure as she received high doses of blood pressure medications. It would not be acceptable for nurses to prepare more than one person's medications at one time ever. On 1/15/25 at 11:48 a.m., NP-A stated she found out R1 was given the wrong medications on the morning of 1/6/25, and became worried about R1's blood pressure, pulse, alertness, and level of consciousness. She told the facility to send R1 to the ED when her blood pressure and pulse dropped, and she was complaining of dizziness. She would expect staff to complete one resident's medications at a time. It would never be accepted to do set up multiple resident medications at one time. On 1/15/25 at 12:04 p.m., the director of nursing (DON) stated the process of staff passing medications was to follow the medication rights, and do prepare medications for one resident at a time. The policy was not followed by RN-A on 1/6/25. The facility had reviewed the medication administration and medication incident policy, revised the medication administration standards policy, reviewed R1's care plan, started medications administration audits, provided education to nurses in regards to medication pass expectations, and P-A would be coming on 1/30/25 to do more education on medication administration. The facility Medication Administration policy revised 12/4/24, identified staff administering medication would ensure the correct medication was administered in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications or provider's order, to the correct person via the correct route in the correct dosage form, and at the correct time. The facility implemented corrective action to prevent recurrence by 1/14/25 when the facility completed the following: Reviewed and revised medication administration policies, provided education to all staff members responsible for medication administration, which included administration of medications and ensuring the six rights of medication administration was being followed, and completed medication administration audits. Verification of corrective action was confirmed by observation, interview, and document review on 1/14/25 and 1/15/25.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade B+ (85/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Minnesota.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Minnesota facilities.
  • • 35% turnover. Below Minnesota's 48% average. Good staff retention means consistent care.
Concerns
  • • 1 deficiencies on record, including 1 serious (caused harm) violation. Ask about corrective actions taken.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY an overall rating of 5 out of 5 stars, which is considered much above average nationally. Within Minnesota, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay Staffed?

CMS rates MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY's staffing level at 5 out of 5 stars, which is much above average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 35%, compared to the Minnesota average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay?

State health inspectors documented 1 deficiencies at MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY during 2025. These included: 1 that caused actual resident harm. Deficiencies causing actual harm indicate documented cases where residents experienced negative health consequences.

Who Owns and Operates Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay?

MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY is owned by a government entity. Government-operated facilities are typically run by state, county, or municipal agencies. The facility operates independently rather than as part of a larger chain. With 54 certified beds and approximately 45 residents (about 83% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in SILVER BAY, Minnesota.

How Does Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay Compare to Other Minnesota Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Minnesota, MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY's overall rating (5 stars) is above the state average of 3.2, staff turnover (35%) is significantly lower than the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"

Is Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 5-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Minnesota. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay Stick Around?

MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY has a staff turnover rate of 35%, which is about average for Minnesota nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay Ever Fined?

MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Minnesota Veterans Home - Silver Bay on Any Federal Watch List?

MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME - SILVER BAY is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.