Overall sentiment in these reviews is sharply mixed, with a clear split between reviewers praising the day-to-day caregivers and those reporting serious administrative, safety, and communication problems. Several reviewers describe compassionate, hardworking, and knowledgeable staff who make residents feel like family, and they highlight a clean, welcoming physical environment and smooth daily activities—advantages often associated with a smaller facility. At the same time, multiple reports describe serious lapses in communication, safety, and professional conduct from management and some staff members.
Care quality and safety emerge as central and contentious themes. Positive comments focus on individual caregivers who are friendly, caring, and attentive. Conversely, the negative reports include concrete safety concerns: patients falling, residents coming down with the flu (including staff on duty being sick), an oxygen order error, and general allegations of neglect. There are also health-concern reports such as swollen feet and accounts of residents being placed on comfort care amid disputed decisions. These incidents suggest variability in clinical oversight and infection control practices, and several reviewers explicitly conclude the facility is not safe or recommend against sending loved ones there.
Communication and administrative issues are another major cluster of complaints. Multiple summaries note poor family communication, unreturned phone calls, long delays in administrative actions (including release delays), and miscommunication surrounding hospitalizations and care transitions. Reviewers cite finger-pointing and a lack of accountability when problems arise. The limited accessibility of the attending physician—described as only reachable while on-site—was raised as a barrier to timely decisions. Financial and front-office interactions were criticized as well: rude or unsympathetic accounting staff and an unprofessional approach from at least one Director were explicitly mentioned. These administrative behaviors compound clinical concerns and contribute to distrust among some family members.
Property, daily life, and community character are generally viewed more positively. Multiple reviewers praised the outdoor areas as clean and the lobby as welcoming. Day-to-day activities run smoothly for many residents, and the facility’s small size is seen as both a benefit—leading to a more intimate, family-like atmosphere—and a drawback for others (potentially implying limited resources or staff coverage). There is also mention of a long-standing community presence and testimonials to dedication and excellence in patient care from some reviewers, indicating that the facility has defenders who have observed consistently good care.
Personal belongings and professionalism are recurring concerns. Multiple reports of missing personal items—clothes and jewelry—are troubling because they point to lax property management and potential issues with resident dignity and trust. Alongside these loss/theft allegations are claims of unprofessional conduct by certain staff members, including leadership-level behavior that family members found unacceptable. Several reviewers explicitly called for retraining or dismissal of staff responsible for poor customer service.
Patterns suggest a polarized experience where the quality of care may depend strongly on specific staff members and how management handles problems. Prospective families should note both the consistently cited strengths (compassionate caregivers, clean outdoor spaces, smooth routines, small-community feel) and the recurring weaknesses (communication breakdowns, administrative delays, safety incidents, missing belongings, and isolated reports of unprofessional leadership and accounting interactions). Given the mix of positive firsthand caregiving experiences and alarming reports of safety and administrative failures, anyone considering this facility should ask direct, specific questions about incident reporting, staffing ratios, physician coverage, infection-control policies, property-management procedures, and family communication protocols, and should seek recent references from current residents’ families before making a placement decision.
