Overall sentiment from the reviews is mixed and polarized: some reviewers strongly recommend Because We Care Assisted Living, praising experienced caregivers, a clean and loving environment, homemade food, and residents who appear to thrive; other reviewers report serious safety, staffing, and management concerns that they say make the facility unacceptable. The positive reports depict a small, caring assisted living home with long-standing caregivers and a family-like atmosphere where some residents receive attentive, high-quality care. Those reviews emphasize cleanliness, homemade meals, and staff members who demonstrate experience and compassion.
However, multiple negative summaries raise severe and specific issues that point to potential systemic problems. Key safety concerns include residents being left unattended during meals, food being placed on a rolling tray rather than properly served, medication problems (including medications that reportedly made a resident excessively sleepy), and fall risk being disregarded. There are also very serious allegations that oxygen was not turned on for a resident who needed it, and that the facility represented itself as a self-assisted home despite caring for hospice-level residents. These are concrete clinical and safety complaints that, if accurate, suggest gaps in clinical oversight, care planning, and staff training.
Staffing and behavior complaints are prominent and varied. Several reviewers describe inexperienced or untrained staff and a lack of urgency responding to resident needs; others report staff being rude or uncaring. The most alarming personnel allegations include a caregiver being intoxicated on duty and medication cabinets being left open and unattended—both of which raise concerns about supervision, policies, and secure medication management. At the same time, other reviewers describe experienced caregivers and recommend the facility, indicating considerable inconsistency in staff performance and perhaps differences across shifts or over time.
Dining and nutritional care also show a clear divide. Positive reviewers mention homemade food and satisfying meals, whereas negative reviewers describe poor-quality food served in small portions and heavy reliance on processed items (nuggets, frozen pizza, canned soup). Reports of food being served on a rolling tray and residents left alone during mealtime tie back into the broader concerns about attentiveness and dignity in daily care routines.
Management and responsiveness emerge as another recurrent theme. Multiple negative reviewers state the owner did not address concerns, suggesting possible weaknesses in complaint handling, accountability, and oversight. This cluster of complaints—unsecured medication cabinets, alleged intoxicated staff, failure to provide oxygen, and ignored fall risks—suggests potential deficits in policies, staff training, background checks, supervision, and incident reporting or corrective action. The coexistence of positive and negative reviews points to variability: some residents receive excellent care while others experience worrying lapses.
Taken together, the reviews indicate a facility with potential strengths (compassionate, experienced caregivers in some cases; a clean, home-like environment and homemade meals reported by some families) but also serious, specific safety and management concerns reported by others. The most significant themes that warrant attention are inconsistent care quality, safety and medication management failures, alleged substance impairment of staff, poor handling of clinical needs (oxygen, fall prevention), and management that appears unresponsive to complaints. For prospective residents and families, these patterns suggest the need for careful, targeted questions before choosing this facility: inquire about staffing practices, medication administration procedures and audits, supervision and training, incident history (falls, medication errors), how the facility handles hospice-level needs, food service policies, and how management documents and resolves complaints. If the concerns in the negative reviews are accurate, they indicate issues that could materially affect resident safety and well-being; if the positive reviews are accurate, the facility can offer a warm, home-like environment. The mixed reports make verification and direct observation essential before making placement decisions.
