2218 Doswell Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55108
For more information about senior living options: (866) 208-4318
Overall Review of Derman Senior Care I
Cons
The provider is described as the absolute worst kind of provider.- They report that numbers keep changing and management doesn’t call back after a working phone number is obtained.
- No one is reachable by phone; the greeting is shady, and supervisors, reception, or case managers never return calls.
- They suggest requesting a different case management company if one is stuck with these people.
- The reviewer, who is a case manager themselves, can’t imagine clients not having access to contact their own office when needed.
- Their daughter has been unable to make contact for over a month, despite countless voicemails.
Review
Best suited for residents who can endure persistent gaps in administrative responsiveness and for families prepared to drive coordination themselves. The community presents as a minimal-contact option where front-desk access and supervisor accountability are unreliable, and the onus falls on relatives or external case managers to secure updates and services. In practice, this means a senior who is relatively independent, with limited medical complexity, whose daily needs can be organized through external supports rather than a proactive, on-site care team. For someone expecting timely answers, consistent callbacks, and a professional intake experience, this community is not the right fit.
Alternatives deserve careful consideration for anyone prioritizing dependable communication and coordinated care. Families that require structured care plans, regular progress updates, and predictable staffing should look elsewhere. The pattern observed in the available feedback, changing phone numbers, unreachable lines, and long waits for returned calls, signals a misalignment with standard expectations for assisted living. Those who rely on case managers to flag issues, or who need assurance that supervisors will be reachable and responsive, will likely find this option especially unsatisfactory. In short, the fit is poor for anyone seeking straightforward, reliable engagement.
The most glaring drawbacks are not subtle and center on access to people who can actually help. Numbers keep changing, making it hard to establish a reliable contact point. The initial greeting is described as unhelpful or even “shady,” which immediately erodes trust and sets a negative tone for any subsequent interactions. When calls do reach staff, there is a consistent failure to escalate to supervisors or appropriate case managers. Messages go unreturned for extended periods, sometimes for weeks, leaving families without timely updates on resident health, safety, or care planning. This pattern creates a chronic anxiety for families attempting to monitor and organize essential support.
From a practical perspective, the lack of strong, verifiable pros makes the cons hard to offset. There are no clearly identified strengths in the available feedback, and the ongoing communication failures undermine safety, accountability, and trust. Even if there were basic accommodations or a lower price point, those potential advantages are erased by the unreliability of responses, inconsistent point-of-contact, and the real risk of miscommunication. In an environment where medication routines, discharge planning, and regular family updates matter, an unreliable communications backbone defeats the purpose of choosing assisted living. The overall value proposition collapses under the weight of operational gaps.
Decision-makers should seek concrete assurances before committing. Require defined contact protocols, guaranteed callback windows, and a direct line to the administrator or regional manager. Request documentation of how case management operates, including intake procedures, escalation steps, and weekly resident updates. Tour the facility with a focus on the administrative experience: how messages are logged, how quickly issues are addressed, and whether on-site staff maintain consistent oversight of residents. Compare this with peers that offer structured communication, transparent staffing, and proactive care planning. If dependable communication and coordinated care are non-negotiable, this option should be deprioritized in favor of better-run alternatives.
Bottom line: the current evidence suggests this community is unlikely to meet the needs of families demanding reliable staff access, timely updates, and accountable care coordination. It may be considered only for those who can absorb substantial administrative friction as a trade-off for other potential advantages, such as lower costs or markedly self-directed living arrangements. For residents with medical complexity, cognitive needs, or safety concerns, steering toward providers with proven responsiveness and strong leadership is prudent. In the Saint Paul market, stronger reputations exist for care coordination, and pursuing those options will reduce risk and improve the likelihood of a stable, well-supported living situation.
21 resident community capacity
Assisted Living
Beauty salon
Cable or satellite TV
Dining room
Fully furnished
Garden
Housekeeping services
Kitchenette
Move-in coordination
Outdoor space
Restaurant-style dining
Small library
Telephone
Wi-Fi/high-speed internet available
Minneapolis-St Paul International (7 miles away)
24-hour call system
Activities of daily living assistance
Assistance with bathing
Assistance with dressing
Assistance with transfers
Diabetes diet
Medication management
Mental wellness program
Special dietary restrictions
Excellent location with abundant nearby dining, parks, healthcare, worship, entertainment, and transit.
Social Security Benefits and Assisted Living: Navigating Options Across the U.S.
An Extensive Exploration of the VA Aid and Attendance Benefit
Senior Transition Services: Understanding Their Role, Cost, and Importance