Assisted Living and Memory Care

Valora Senior Living of Orono

2635 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 · Map
Licensed for 80 residents · VALORA ORONO LLC

State license active

Is this your community? Claim this listing

Valora Senior Living of Orono is a state-licensed assisted living, memory care community in Orono, Minnesota. It is licensed for 80 residents. Lilisity publishes no score or ranking for this community; the details below come from the state licensing record.

Assisted LivingAlso memory care

80 residentsLicensed capacity

State licensedAssisted living facility dementia care

$2,500 to $4,400/moTypical assisted living start in Hennepin County, from 18 communities that publish prices

Prices

This community does not publish its prices.

Area costs

Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Memory Care in Minnesota typically starts at $3,900 to $8,600 a month. Based on 40 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price.

Care and services

From the community’s website

What Valora Senior Living of Orono says about itself, quoted from its own site. We have not checked these claims against licensing records. Ask about each one on a tour.

Offers respite or short-term stays. Respite & Recovery (page, checked Oct 15, 2026)
Offers hospice care on site or works with hospice providers. Hospice Services and more… (page, checked Oct 15, 2026)
Apartment types named: studio, two-bedroom. Spacious studio, 1-, and 2-bedroom floor plans (page, checked Oct 12, 2026)

Lilisity’s independent report

What the public record shows

Gathered by Lilisity from state and federal sources. Communities can’t edit this part of the page.

State inspections

0Substantiated investigations

Last evaluation: May 28, 2026. See the record

License

Active, 80 residents

Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care 423553, current license dated Dec 10, 2025. Licensee VALORA ORONO LLC.

Nearest emergency room

11.3 miles

Maple Grove Hospital, rated 5 of 5 stars by CMS.

Side by side with nearby communities

The 4 nearest communities that offer assisted living, by straight-line distance. Prices are starting prices each community publishes; we never show estimates.

Community	Distance	Licensed capacity	Published starting price	License	Inspection citations
Valora Senior Living of Orono this community		80	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Long Lake Assisted Living	0.9 mi	42	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Gentlehands Home Health Care L	4.2 mi	5	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Trails of Orono Senior Living	4.2 mi	70	Not published	Active	0 substantiated
Advocate House Assisted Living	4.3 mi	5	Not published	Active	0 substantiated

State inspection record0 substantiated

Last evaluation: May 28, 2026
Evaluations on record: 2
Investigations substantiated: 0 kept 7 years
Inconclusive: 0 kept 4 years
Unsubstantiated: 1 kept 3 years

Most recent evaluation (May 28, 2026, state report IYL811)

MDH: “On May 26, 2026, through May 28, 2026, the Minnesota Department of Health conducted a full survey at the above provider and the following correction orders are issued.”

Survey completed May 29, 2026: 15 correction orders

Tag 480: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Subd. 1a (a-b) Minimum requirements; required food services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Please refer
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure food was prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all the [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), food must be prepared and served according to the Minnesota Food Code, Minnesota Rules, chapter 4626. [...]”
Tag 510: 144G.41 Subd. 3 Infection control program Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain an effective infection control program to comply with acceptable health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control, by not cleaning shared equipment, and not performing appropriate hand hygiene, for two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and ULP-G).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to maintain an effective infection control program to comply with acceptable health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control, by not cleaning shared equipment, and not performing appropriate hand hygiene, for two of three employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E and ULP-G). This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) All assisted living facilities must establish and maintain an infection control program that complies with accepted health care, medical, and nursing standards for infection control. [...]”
Tag 630: 144G.42 Subd. 6 (b) Compliance with requirements for reporting ma Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to ensure an individual abuse prevention plan (IAPP) was developed to include the required content for one of one independent residents (R6). [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) The facility must develop and implement an individual abuse prevention plan for each vulnerable adult. [...]”
Tag 700: 144G.43 Subdivision 1 Resident record Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review the licensee failed to ensure residents' personal health and medical information was kept private for three of three residents (R7, R9 and R16). This had the potential to affect all residents. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Resident records, whether written or electronic, must be protected against loss, tampering, or unauthorized disclosure in compliance with chapter 13 and other applicable relevant federal and state laws. [...]”
Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”

Show all 15

Tag 810: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (b-f) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty One (21) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the physical environment of the facility was maintained in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statute 144G. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each assisted living facility shall develop and maintain fire safety and evacuation plans. [...]”
Tag 1350: 144G.60 Subd. 5 Temporary staff Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the facility failed to ensure orientation to assisted living licensing and requirements was completed for all employees prior to providing services for one of one agency staff (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the facility failed to ensure orientation to assisted living licensing and requirements was completed for all employees prior to providing services for one of one agency staff (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-H). [...]”
Rule cited: “When a facility contracts with a temporary staffing agency, those individuals must meet the same requirements required by this section for personnel employed by the facility and shall be treated as if they are staff of the facility.”
Tag 1540: 144G.64 (a) (3) Training in Dementia, Mental Illness, and De- Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required two hours of initial training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure direct care staff received the required two hours of initial training on mental illness and de-escalation topics for one of one employee (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-E). [...]”
Rule cited: “(3) for assisted living facilities with dementia care, direct-care staff must have completed at least eight hours of initial training on topics specified under paragraph (b) within 80 working hours of the employment start date. [...]”
Tag 1620: 144G.70 Subd. 2 (c-e) Initial reviews, assessments, and monitoring Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted assessments within 14-days following a residents admission date for two of three residents (R2 and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the registered nurse (RN) conducted assessments within 14-days following a residents admission date for two of three residents (R2 and R4). The licensee also failed to ensure the RN conducted ongoing nursing assessments not to exceed every 90-days thereafter for one of three residents (R3). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) Residents who are not receiving any assisted living services shall not be required to undergo an initial nursing assessment. [...]”
Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure there was a service plan initiated to document agreement on the services to be provided for two of two resident (R2 and R4).
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure there was a service plan initiated to document agreement on the services to be provided for two of two resident (R2 and R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
Tag 1730: 144G.71 Subd. 5 Individualized medication management plan Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to develop and maintain a current individualized medication management record for each resident to include all required content for one of three residents (R4). [...]”
Rule cited: “(a) For each resident receiving medication management services, a registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, or qualified staff delegated the task by a registered nurse must prepare and include in the service plan a written statement of the [...]”
Tag 1880: 144G.71 Subd. 19 Storage of medications Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to store prescription medication securely and permit only authorized personnel to have access for two of two medication carts located in the secured memory care unit.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to store prescription medication securely and permit only authorized personnel to have access for two of two medication carts located in the secured memory care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “An assisted living facility must store all prescription medications in securely locked and substantially constructed compartments according to the manufacturer's directions and permit only authorized personnel to have access.”
Tag 1890: 144G.71 Subd. 20 Prescription drugs Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure time
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to ensure time sensitive medications were dated when opened for medications in three of three medication carts with time sensitive medications. In addition, the licensee failed to monitor for expired medication in one of three medication carts. [...]”
Rule cited: “A prescription drug, prior to being set up for immediate or later administration, must be kept in the original container in which it was dispensed by the pharmacy bearing the original prescription label with legible information including the expiration or [...]”
Tag 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to conduct an evaluation for activities that addressed all provisions and failed to develop an individualized
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview and record review, the licensee failed to conduct an evaluation for activities that addressed all provisions and failed to develop an individualized activity plan based on the evaluation, for one of one residents (R1) who resided in the secured memory care unit. [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
Tag 2320: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (b) Appropriate care and services Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
Details
Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G followed appropriate medication administration procedures.
MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure unlicensed personnel (ULP)-G followed appropriate medication administration procedures. This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at a widespread scope (when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or [...]”
Rule cited: “(b) Residents have the right to receive health care and other assisted living services with continuity from people who are properly trained and competent to perform their duties and in sufficient numbers to adequately provide the services agreed to in the [...]”

From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.

Food and beverage inspection (included in this report): Food and beverage inspection report included

Fines assessed by MDH

Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
Tag 810 (144g.45 Subd. 2 (b-F) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00

Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $1,000.00.

Earlier evaluations (1)

April 10, 2025: report K6OL11 · 12 correction orders
Details
Survey completed April 10, 2025: 12 correction orders
- Tag 470: 144G.41 Subdivision 1 Minimum requirements Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) developed a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents and ensure the staffing plan was reviewed at a minimum of twice a year as required.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the clinical nurse supervisor (CNS) developed a staffing plan to determine staffing levels to meet the needs of all residents and ensure the staffing plan was reviewed at a minimum of twice a year as required. This had the potential to affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(11) develop and implement a staffing plan for determining its staffing level that: (i) includes an evaluation, to be conducted at least twice a year, of the appropriateness of staffing levels in the facility; (ii) ensures sufficient staffing at all times to [...]”
- Tag 775: 144G.45 Subd. 2. (a) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Two (2) days · fine: $500.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota State Fire Code. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
  Rule cited: “Each assisted living facility must comply with the State Fire Code in Minnesota Rules, chapter 7511, and:”
- Tag 800: 144G.45 Subd. 2 (a) (4) Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Seven (7) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation and interview, the licensee failed to maintain the facility's physical environment in a continuous state of good repair and operation regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the residents. This had the potential to directly affect all residents, staff, and visitors. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(4) keep the physical environment, including walls, floors, ceiling, all furnishings, grounds, systems, and equipment in a continuous state of good repair and operation with regard to the health, safety, comfort, and well-being of the residents in accordance [...]”
- Tag 1040: 144G.52 Subd. 7 Notice of contract termination required Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to issue a written notice of termination to one of one resident (R1) and the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to issue a written notice of termination to one of one resident (R1) and the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care This practice resulted in a level two violation (a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety) and was issued at an isolated scope (when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) A facility terminating a contract must issue a written notice of termination according to this section. [...]”
- Tag 1060: 144G.52 Subd. 9 Emergency relocation Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation lasting more than four (4) days for four of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to provide a written notice with the required content for an emergency relocation and failed to notify the Office of Ombudsman for Long-Term Care (OOLTC) of the emergency relocation lasting more than four (4) days for four of five residents (R1, R3, R4, R5). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) A facility may remove a resident from the facility in an emergency if necessary due to a resident's urgent medical needs or an imminent risk the resident poses to the health or safety of another facility resident or facility staff member. [...]”
Show all 12
- Tag 1290: 144G.60 Subdivision 1 Background studies required Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a cleared Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS)
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a cleared Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) background study clearance for two of four employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-D, ULP-E). This resulted in an immediate correction order issued on April 8, 2025. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Employees, contractors, and regularly scheduled volunteers of the facility are subject to the background study required by section 144.057 and may be disqualified under chapter 245C. [...]”
- Tag 1440: 144G.62 Subd. 4 Supervision of staff providing delegated nurs Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-One (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks within 30 days of providing services for one of two unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-F).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure a registered nurse (RN) conducted direct supervision of staff performing delegated tasks within 30 days of providing services for one of two unlicensed personnel ((ULP)-F). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Staff who perform delegated nursing or therapy tasks must be supervised by an appropriate licensed health professional or a registered nurse according to the assisted living facility's policy where the services are being provided to verify that the work [...]”
- Tag 1500: 144G.63 Subd. 5 Required annual training Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure annual training was provided and included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure annual training was provided and included all required topics for each 12 months of employment for one of two employees (unlicensed personnel (ULP)-F). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) All staff that perform direct services must complete at least eight hours of annual training for each 12 months of employment. [...]”
- Tag 1640: 144G.70 Subd. 4 (a-e) Service plan, implementation and revisions to Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure revised service plans were authenticated by the resident or resident's representative for one of four residents (R4).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure revised service plans were authenticated by the resident or resident's representative for one of four residents (R4). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) No later than 14 calendar days after the date that services are first provided, an assisted living facility shall finalize a current written service plan. [...]”
- Tag 2040: 144G.81 Subdivision 1 Fire protection and physical environment Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on record review and interview, the licensee failed to provide a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk assessment of the physical environment on and around the property. This deficient practice had the ability to affect all staff, residents, and visitors. [...]”
  Rule cited: “An assisted living facility with dementia care that has a secured dementia care unit must meet the requirements of section 144G.45 and the following additional requirements: (1) a hazard vulnerability assessment or safety risk must be performed on and around [...]”
- Tag 2170: 144G.84 SERVICES FOR RESIDENTS WITH DEMENTIA Level 2, widespread scope, scope/level letter F · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure an individualized activities evaluation contained all required content for two of two residents (R4, R5) residing in the memory care unit.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure an individualized activities evaluation contained all required content for two of two residents (R4, R5) residing in the memory care unit. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(b) Each resident must be evaluated for activities according to the licensing rules of the facility. [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 3, isolated scope, scope/level letter G · correction period: Immediate · fine: $3,000.00 assessed
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for two of three residents (R3, R5) who utilized hospital or consumer bed rails.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on observation, interview, and record review, the licensee failed to provide care and services according to acceptable health care, medical or nursing standards for two of three residents (R3, R5) who utilized hospital or consumer bed rails. [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”
From MDH’s letter: the letter says the facility is in substantial compliance.
Fines assessed by MDH
- Tag 775 (144g.45 Subd. 2. (a) - Fire Protection And Physical Environment): $500.00
- Tag 1290 (144g.60 Subdivision 1 - Background Studies Required): $3,000.00
- Tag 2310 (144g.91 Subd. 4 (a) - Appropriate Care And Services): $3,000.00
Total fines assessed, as printed in the letter: $6,500.00.

Unsubstantiated investigations (1)

January 22, 2025 · report HL367346646M · MDH finding: Not Substantiated
Details
Allegation, as written: “The facility neglected the resident when it failed to recognize a stroke in a resident.”
“The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated.”
Summary: MDH looked into an allegation and found: neglect not substantiated.
MDH’s conclusion, as written: “The Minnesota Department of Health determined neglect was not substantiated. The resident did suffer a stroke; however, it was unclear when the stroke actually occurred. When the resident developed clear symptoms indicative of a stroke, the facility assessed and sought care appropriately.”
Action taken by facility: “The facility unlicensed staff updated the nurse appropriately. Initially, the facility's assessment included a test for Covid. The facility assessed the resident, contacted family, and arranged for transportation to the hospital.”
Action taken by MDH: “The facility was found to be in noncompliance.”
Survey completed December 31, 2024: 2 correction orders
- Tag 730: 144G.43 Subd. 3 Contents of resident record Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included assessment documentation when a resident(R1) displayed a change of condition.
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and record review, the licensee failed to ensure the resident record included assessment documentation when a resident(R1) displayed a change of condition. [...]”
  Rule cited: “Contents of a resident record include the following for each resident: (1) identifying information, including the resident's name, date of birth, address, and telephone number; (2) the name, address, and telephone number of the resident's emergency contact, [...]”
- Tag 2310: 144G.91 Subd. 4 (a) Appropriate care and services Level 2, isolated scope, scope/level letter D · correction period: Twenty-one (21) days
  Details
  Summary: MDH found the licensee failed to ensure appropriate care and services were provided based on the resident's needs in accordance with an up-to-date service plan and accepted health care standards for one of one resident (R1).
  MDH’s finding, as written: “Based on interview and document review, the licensee failed to ensure appropriate care and services were provided based on the resident's needs in accordance with an up-to-date service plan and accepted health care standards for one of one resident (R1). [...]”
  Rule cited: “(a) Residents have the right to care and assisted living services that are appropriate based on the resident's needs and according to an up-to-date service plan subject to accepted health care standards.”

What the levels and scopes mean (MDH’s words)

Level 2: “a violation that did not harm a resident's health or safety but had the potential to have harmed a resident's health or safety, but was not likely to cause serious injury, impairment, or death”

Level 3: “a violation that harmed a resident's health or safety, not including serious injury, impairment, or death, or a violation that has the potential to lead to serious injury, impairment, or death”

Isolated scope: “when one or a limited number of residents are affected or one or a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred only occasionally”

Pattern scope: “when more than a limited number of residents are affected, more than a limited number of staff are involved, or the situation has occurred repeatedly; but is not found to be pervasive”

Widespread scope: “when problems are pervasive or represent a systemic failure that has affected or has the potential to affect a large portion or all of the residents”

Summaries are ours and are marked “Summary”; quoted text is MDH’s own, shortened where marked [...]. Read the full reports at the links above or search every report on MDH’s site.

What these terms mean

MDH: “An evaluation is a process regulated by the division to ensure licensees comply with the laws, rules, and certifications for the type of care and services authorized under their license/certification.”

“An investigation may occur when the division is notified that care and services are not being provided by licensees as required by law. This may include allegations of abuse, neglect, or financial misuse.”

For maltreatment, Minnesota law defines substantiated as “a preponderance of the evidence shows that an act that meets the definition of maltreatment occurred” and inconclusive as “less than a preponderance of evidence to show that maltreatment did or did not occur” (Minn. Stat. 626.5572).

Correction orders, as MDH explains on each state form: “Tag numbers have been assigned to Minnesota State Statutes for Assisted Living Facilities.” “The letter in the left column is used for tracking purposes and reflects the scope and level issued pursuant to 144G.31 subd. 1, 2, and 3.” MDH adds that there is no requirement to submit a plan of correction for violations of Minnesota state statutes.

MDH keeps investigation results for seven years when allegations are substantiated, four years when inconclusive, and three years when unsubstantiated, so the counts cover different periods. This community is licensed for 80 residents; larger communities are evaluated and reported on more often, so read counts with size in mind. Source: Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division, data as of September 28, 2026. Always visit in person and ask the community about anything listed here.

License and ownershipActive license, licensee VALORA ORONO LLC

License type: Assisted Living Facility Dementia Care
License number: 423553
License status: Active
Current license dated: 2025-12-10
Licensed capacity: 80
Licensee: VALORA ORONO LLC
County: Hennepin County
Administrator/Authorized Agent: Jason Hagemeyer

Source: Minnesota state licensing records (agency listing), retrieved 2026-09-09. Licensing status is a matter of public record; it is not a quality rating.

Administrator/Authorized Agent name from the Minnesota licensing record, as of Sep 9, 2026.

Paying with Medicaid and other programsHow Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota, and other programs

How Medicaid pays for care in Minnesota

Elderly Waiver (EW), customized living services. Minnesota's Elderly Waiver, part of Medical Assistance (Minnesota Medicaid), can pay for "customized living" services, and a provider of those services must hold an assisted living license (or meet certain exceptions). You must qualify for Medical Assistance and need a nursing-home level of care. (state page)

Ask the community whether it accepts Medicaid.

Location and nearby careNearest hospital 11.3 mi, nursing home 4.3 mi, pharmacy 4.3 mi

Nearest hospital with an emergency room: Maple Grove Hospital, Maple Grove. 11.3 miles away, straight line. CMS overall hospital rating: 5 of 5 stars.
Nearest Medicare nursing home: Folkestone, Wayzata. 4.3 miles away, straight line.
Nearest home health agency office: Bayada Home Health Care Inc, Plymouth. 6.9 miles away, straight line. Agencies travel to clients, so ask which ones serve this address.
Nearest pharmacy: CVS Pharmacy. 4.3 miles away, straight line. From OpenStreetMap, which does not list every pharmacy, so one may be closer.
Area: USDA classes ZIP code 55356 as metropolitan (metropolitan core).
Dialysis within 15 miles: Fmc - Plymouth Creek, Plymouth, 6.5 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Davita Minnetonka Dialysis Unit, Minnetonka, 6.9 miles away, straight line (CMS rating 2 of 5 stars)
Fmc - Maple Grove Dialysis, Maple Grove, 10.2 miles away, straight line (has a shift starting after 5 pm; CMS rating 3 of 5 stars)
Hospice: 12 Medicare hospices tell CMS they serve ZIP code 55356.
Moments Hospice, office in Golden Valley, 11.8 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 1 of 5 stars)
Lifesprk Hospice LLC, office in Saint Louis Park, 12.1 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 2 of 5 stars)
Brighton Hospice, office in Saint Louis Park, 12.7 miles away, straight line (CMS family survey rating 3 of 5 stars)
Nearest geriatric medicine practice: Twin Cities Physicians Professional Corporation, Golden Valley. 11.7 miles away, straight line. 3 geriatric medicine doctors listed there.

Distances are straight lines from the community, not driving distance. Hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors come from CMS provider data (CMS, hospital list updated Jul 22, 2026). Star ratings are CMS’s own.

Emergency and natural hazard riskFEMA overall risk relatively low; outside FEMA's high-risk flood areas

Public hazard maps for this location. Ask the community about its emergency plan, its generator and where residents would go in an evacuation.

Flood zone: Outside the high and moderate risk flood areas on FEMA's flood map (Zone X, minimal flood hazard, or not studied). (FEMA flood map)
FEMA National Risk Index: Overall: relatively low. By hazard: inland flooding relatively low, wildfire relatively low, tornado relatively moderate, heat wave relatively moderate, earthquake very low. These are FEMA’s ratings for the census tract, compared with tracts nationwide. (FEMA, December 2025)

A flood zone describes the map at this point, not the building's elevation. In an emergency, follow the local emergency management agency.

Questions to ask on a tour10 questions picked for this community from its record

Picked for this community from its record. Ask them in person and write down the answers.

The current license dates from 2025. Has the owner or operator changed recently?
What does the base rate include, and when did rates last go up?
How many caregivers work in memory care during the day, the evening and overnight, and for how many residents?
What dementia training does each caregiver get before working alone, and every year after?
How do staff respond when a resident is agitated, frightened or tries to leave?
How many caregivers are on duty during the day and at night?
What happens if care needs increase? When would someone need to move?
What fees are charged at move-in?
How do you tell families about falls, illness or changes?
How long have the executive director and the head of care been here?

What we checked12 public sources we searched, with dates

Every public source we searched for this community. “Nothing on record” means we found no record that matched it. A record can be missed when a name or address differs.

Source	Data as of	What we found
Minnesota Department of Health, Health Regulation Division inspection records	Sep 28, 2026	See above
U.S. Department of Labor wage and hour cases	Oct 15, 2026	Nothing on record
OSHA workplace safety inspections since 2016	Oct 15, 2026	Nothing on record
FEMA flood map		See above
USDA wildfire risk	Apr 15, 2026	Not shown: FEMA rates wildfire risk here relatively low
FEMA National Risk Index		See above
CMS hospitals, home health, dialysis, hospice and doctors; OpenStreetMap pharmacies		See above
HUD Multifamily Properties - Assisted	Jul 6, 2026	Nothing on record
State Veterans Homes (NASVH directory)	Sep 20, 2026	Nothing on record
CMS Hospice - General Information	Aug 19, 2026	Nothing on record
CMS Home Health Care Agencies	May 27, 2026	Nothing on record
The community’s own website		See above

Common questionsAnswers to 4 questions families ask

What type of care does Valora Senior Living of Orono provide?

Valora Senior Living of Orono is licensed by the state of Minnesota for assisted living, memory care in Orono, Minnesota. Its licensed capacity is 80 residents.

Does Lilisity rate Valora Senior Living of Orono?

No. We publish state licensing details for Valora Senior Living of Orono but no score, rating, or ranking. Only communities on the Top Communities list or with a Senior Living Alliance Excellence Award, both based on phone-verified resident and family interviews, are ranked.

How much does Valora Senior Living of Orono cost?

Assisted Living in Hennepin County typically starts at $2,500 to $4,400 a month. Based on 18 communities that publish prices. These are area figures, not this community's price. Valora Senior Living of Orono does not publish its prices.

How do I contact Valora Senior Living of Orono?

Use Valora Senior Living of Orono's website, valoraoforono.com, or visit at 2635 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356.

Choosing assisted livingOur care guide: what to look for, what it costs, how families pay, and more questions to ask (PDF)

Report a wrong fact

How Lilisity works. The only scores or rankings Lilisity publishes are the Top Communities list and the Excellence Awards, both built from phone-verified resident and family interviews. Communities can pay Lilisity a flat monthly fee to manage their own listing: photos, prices, contact details, and receiving the inquiries families choose to send them. The fee is the same no matter how many families contact them or move in. Senior Living Alliance, which runs Lilisity, offers the same listing to its member communities as part of their membership; members pay SLA for its resident and family interview program. No community pays Lilisity per inquiry, per referral or per move-in. Payment never changes a testimonial, a rating, or the order of search results. The "Nearby Senior Living Alliance communities" box shows member communities only. How we verify testimonials · How we are paid

Other communities in Hennepin County