Aurora On France: Medication Supply Failures - MN
She had already called the pharmacy twice about the losartan during her previous shift on Tuesday.
By 9:50 that morning, LPN-C had obtained a one-time order from the nurse practitioner to give the resident losartan 50 mg instead of the prescribed 75 mg. Staff were not permitted to split tablets to make up the difference. The resident, identified in inspection records as R57, was mentally sharp, with a cognitive assessment score of 13 out of 15.
The day before, a registered nurse conducting a medication pass for another resident, R29, found four medications missing at once: ginkgo biloba, a multivitamin with minerals, vitamin B12, and vitamin E. She checked the medication cart and the available house stock. Nothing. "So I am missing 4 different med," RN-E told inspectors. "That's a lot."
RN-E said she would fax and call the pharmacy to get the medications delivered that day. Because the missing items were vitamins rather than urgent medications, she said she would need to notify the provider. R29, also cognitively intact with a perfect assessment score of 15, had been admitted to the facility and was relying on staff to manage his medication regimen.
Federal inspectors from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services documented both incidents during a May 2026 inspection of Aurora On France, a nursing facility in Edina. The inspection cited the facility for failing to ensure medications were available to meet residents' needs, a finding that affected two of five residents reviewed for medication administration.
The breakdown wasn't a mystery to the nurses involved. RN-E explained that medications were supposed to be reordered when the supply reached the last row of a medication card, leaving enough time for delivery before the supply ran out. The nurse manager and another registered nurse, RN-F, told inspectors the expectation was for whichever nurse administered the medication to reorder it when about seven days of supply remained, with a fax to the pharmacy followed by a phone call to confirm receipt.
That confirmation step was where things fell apart. RN-F acknowledged that pharmacy staff sometimes told nurses the refill request had come in too early. Other times, the pharmacy said the fax never arrived. And nurses, RN-F said, did not always have time to call back and verify. "It should not be that way," RN-F told inspectors, "but life happens."
The facility's own pharmacy policy, dated September 2024, required refill requests to be placed five to seven days before the current supply ran out, specifically to prevent gaps in administration. The gap happened anyway.
The assistant administrator, RN-E noted, was also filling the supplier role and was responsible for reordering house stock medications, a dual responsibility the inspection report did not explain further.
What the report makes plain is the downstream effect. A resident prescribed a specific blood pressure dose received less than what his physician ordered, not because of a clinical decision made for his benefit, but because the right tablets weren't there. A nurse had called the pharmacy twice. It hadn't been enough.
The cyclosporine eye drops for R57, prescribed to be administered that morning, remained unlocated as LPN-C moved through the rest of her medication pass. Whether they were found, or whether that dose was missed, the inspection report does not say.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Aurora On France from 2026-05-28 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Download the official CMS inspection PDF from Medicare.gov
Additional Resources
Data source: This article is based on inspection data downloaded directly from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) via Medicare.gov. CMS releases inspection reports in bulk; we publish the findings as documented by state surveyors in the official Form CMS-2567 Statement of Deficiencies.
Plan of correction: The CMS report we receive does not include the facility's plan of correction. Facilities submit plans of correction separately to state survey agencies and those responses may not be reflected in CMS data at the time of publication. The absence of a plan of correction in our data does not mean one was not filed. Readers who want information about corrective steps taken are encouraged to contact the facility directly or their state survey agency.
Corrections may have occurred: Inspection reports reflect conditions observed on the date of the survey. Facilities may have implemented corrections, staffing changes, additional training, or other remediation since the report was issued. We report what CMS provides and encourage readers to seek current information from the facility.
Editorial process: Inspection findings are extracted from CMS source documents and synthesized using AI, reviewed for factual accuracy against the original report by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: September 21, 2026 · Our methodology
AURORA ON FRANCE in EDINA, MN was cited for violations during a health inspection on May 28, 2026.
She had already called the pharmacy twice about the losartan during her previous shift on Tuesday.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.