Overall sentiment across these reviews is mixed but leans negative, with a clear split between the short-term rehabilitation experience and the longer-term care environment. Multiple reviewers explicitly praise the rehabilitation program: rehab activities (exercises, walking, cognitive exercises) and attentive rehab nurses are noted as strengths. Several comments also highlight friendly staff in those settings, hands-on training opportunities, meaningful relationships with residents, and structured programming such as a Wednesday church service. Some reviewers found rooms to be larger and the facility to be clean in certain units, and an activities director and social worker were present and active in providing programming.
Counterbalancing those positives are consistent and serious concerns about cleanliness, safety, and overall care quality. Multiple summaries mention diarrhea and dehydration risk, dirty bathrooms and bad odors, and even toilets not flushing — all of which raise infection-control and hygiene red flags. Some reviewers explicitly called the facility dirty. There are additional safety and comfort complaints such as beds that are too small and the presence of four-person rooms, which could indicate overcrowding or privacy issues for long-term residents.
Staff behavior and management practices are another prominent theme. Several reviewers describe staff and management as unprofessional, rude, or mean; there are specific complaints about unprofessional management and staff openly complaining about ownership. One extremely concerning report alleges an inappropriate sexual remark by a staff member about another patient, and another indicates a patient was banned from their room. These reports suggest isolated but serious lapses in professionalism, resident dignity, and possibly staff morale. While some staff in rehab settings are praised for being friendly and attentive, other units — particularly long-term care — are described as less attentive, suggesting inconsistent staffing quality across the facility.
Dining and dietary services receive mixed reviews. Some reviewers say the food is adequate, while others call it "horrible" and specifically note that dietary needs for diabetics or other special diets are not accommodated. This inconsistency could reflect differences between units or shifts, but it is a notable concern for residents with special nutritional requirements.
Ratings and overall recommendations trend low: reviews include one-star ratings and a reported overall rating of 2/5, with explicit statements from reviewers advising against entrusting loved ones to the facility. One reviewer indicated they were forced to submit a rating due to app requirements, which complicates interpretation of that specific score but does not negate the pattern of dissatisfaction. At the same time, the positive comments around the rehab unit and specific staff members indicate that parts of the facility can and do deliver acceptable or even good care.
In summary, the reviews depict a facility with a capable rehabilitation program and some caring staff and activities but with significant and recurring concerns in cleanliness, infection control, consistent staff professionalism, management issues, and dietary accommodation. The contrast between relatively strong rehab services and weaker long-term care points to uneven quality across units. These patterns suggest prospective residents and families should inspect the specific unit of interest, ask about infection-control measures, dietary accommodations, staff training and turnover, and observe cleanliness and staffing levels during a visit before making placement decisions.
