12457 Midway Circle, Blaine, MN 55449
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Grace Assisted Living III Costs & Pricing
Grace Assisted Living III offers competitive pricing for its private rooms at $2,800 per month, significantly lower than both the average costs in Ramsey County, which stands at $5,162, and the broader Minnesota state average of $5,090. This affordability positions Grace Assisted Living III as an attractive option for families seeking quality care without the burden of excessive financial strain. The cost difference reflects not only a commitment to accessible assisted living but also highlights the value provided by the facility in delivering personalized support and a nurturing environment for its residents.
| Floor plans | Grace Assisted Living III | Ramsey County | Minnesota |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private | $2,800 | $5,162 | $5,090 |
Assisted Living communities with a similar price nearby
Overall Review of Grace Assisted Living III
Pros
They are hopeful for a tidier yard and better upkeep.
They value a quieter, more peaceful neighborhood.
They look forward to improvements that promote community well-being.
They acknowledge issues but remain optimistic about positive changes.
They want the area to feel cleaner and more welcoming for everyone.
Cons
Constant garbage and debris in the yard.
People screaming and yelling at odd hours throughout the day.
One man seems to regularly be throwing up in the back yard on a regular basis.
Review
Grace Assisted Living III in Blaine, Minnesota, is best suited for residents who accept minimal attention to outdoor upkeep and a loosely controlled environment because price is the primary driver here. In practical terms, the place signals that strong expectations around cleanliness, safety, and a peaceful daily rhythm may not be met. For families seeking a reliable, professionally managed setting with predictable routines, this community should not be the default choice. Alternatives are warranted for nearly every standard senior-care goal, privacy, safety, and dignity included. The question is whether any measurable positives can overcome the concern about what happens outside the doors.
From the available feedback, the yard is characterized by constant garbage and debris, which immediately undermines health and curb appeal. The pattern of people screaming and yelling at odd hours creates a disrupted living environment that makes it hard to rest, exercise, or engage in social activities. A particularly troubling note is one man regularly vomiting in the back yard, which signals potential health and sanitation risks that should never be tolerated in a place that houses vulnerable adults. These incidents are not minor nuisances; they point to gaps in maintenance, supervision, and incident management that demand scrutiny before any commitment.
No explicit positives are documented in the account, so no offset to these major drawbacks emerges. In a decision framework, that means the putative care services, meals, activities, and safety protections are not proven or described in a way that would compensate for outdoor and noise issues. The lack of visible strengths leaves the cons uncountered, and the overall living environment appears unstable. Families should treat this as a red-flag facility unless and until multiple, credible improvements are demonstrated during a formal tour and references check.
How to assess this facility before making a visit final: demand a live tour at different times of day to observe outdoor conditions, noise levels, and staff presence. Request first-hand accounts from current residents or families about safety, housekeeping, and response times to disturbances. Review the latest licensing inspection report and any corrective action plans, especially around sanitation and maintenance. Ask specifically about yard maintenance schedules, waste removal, and how disturbances are managed after hours. Use a checklist focused on safety, cleanliness, and predictable routines to gauge whether the environment can be trusted with daily living.
Given the clear red flags, alternatives in the Blaine area should be prioritized. Compare facilities with documented clean outdoor spaces, quiet common areas, proactive maintenance, and transparent incident handling. Probe staff-to-resident ratios, 24/7 supervision, meal quality, and activity calendars, elements that can offset some risk if present. If finances are constrained, consider whether a lower-cost option exists that does not compromise core needs such as hygiene and safety. The goal is to identify a community where routine, respect, and visible maintenance standards align with the senior’s care requirements.
Bottom line: this community is not well-suited for families seeking a stable, respectful, and well-kept home environment. The yard conditions, noisiness, and explicit health concerns far outweigh any conceivable benefit. Alternatives with a track record of clean grounds, quieter living spaces, and attentive oversight deserve priority. When such alternatives are found, insist on a structured trial period and access to up-to-date inspection reports. In the decision-making process, let safety, cleanliness, and predictable routines drive the choice, with a clear plan to verify improvements before any commitment.













Assisted Living Expenses and Long-Term Care Insurance: A Comprehensive Exploration
Securing Financial Support for Assisted Living: A Comprehensive Overview
Social Security Benefits and Assisted Living: Navigating Options Across the U.S.