Garden Ridge

    18170 N 91st Ave, Peoria, AZ, 85382
    • Independent living
    • Assisted living
    AnonymousLoved one of resident
    4.0

    Warm community with notable shortcomings

    I toured and moved my loved one here and overall I'm pleased. The staff are kind, attentive and helpful, residents are friendly, and the grounds and apartments are spacious, well-kept and pet-friendly - good value and a great location. Activities and social life are solid, but meals are inconsistent (sometimes quite good, sometimes bland or slow) and dining service can be understaffed. Communication from management and the medical director is hit-or-miss, and some building upkeep (carpets, paint, minor repairs) needs attention. Despite flaws, it's a warm, safe community I would recommend with reservations.

    Pricing

    Schedule a Tour

    Amenities

    4.00 · 156 reviews

    Overall rating

    1. 5
    2. 4
    3. 3
    4. 2
    5. 1
    • Care

      3.9
    • Staff

      4.0
    • Meals

      2.9
    • Amenities

      3.8
    • Value

      3.5

    Pros

    • Caring, friendly and attentive staff
    • Strong, compassionate nursing and caregiver moments
    • Beautiful, well-maintained grounds and landscaping
    • Spacious apartments with full kitchens and storage
    • Private patios, balconies, and first-floor patios available
    • Pet- and dog-friendly with fenced outdoor areas
    • Weekly apartment housekeeping (vacuuming, fresh sheets)
    • Active social life with many activities and outings
    • Dining area that encourages socialization
    • Flexible move-in and transition support noted by many
    • Perceived good value or affordability by multiple reviewers
    • On-site transportation and convenient local access
    • Resort-like campus feel in many areas
    • Thorough Parkinson's and memory-care moments reported
    • Helpful move-in/placement assistance for many families
    • Some reports of responsive maintenance and repairs
    • Multiple reports of happy, well-settled residents
    • Good-sized floor plans (studios to two-bedrooms) and closets
    • Some reviewers report high-quality meals and improving food
    • 24/7 on-site medical staff claimed by some residents/families

    Cons

    • Inconsistent and often poor food quality
    • Frequent understaffing and slow dining service/long waits
    • Mixed staff quality — great caregivers but variability exists
    • Maintenance issues: slow repairs and recurring problems
    • Cleanliness lapses (stained carpets, dirty windows, dusty seals)
    • Dated interior décor and some institutional/nursing-home vibe
    • Management and communication problems (unresponsive directors)
    • Marketing/ALTCS misinformation and limited ALTCS options
    • One-time community fee ($2,500) and pricing increases
    • Medication mismanagement and critical care lapses reported
    • Laundry problems and reports of returned soiled clothing
    • Missed care (missed showers, missed overnight checks) and reliability concerns
    • Reports of residents wandering at night and safety worries
    • Conflicts around memory-care placement and private caregiver mandates
    • Broken processes, poor corporate oversight, and inconsistent policies
    • Occasional pest/bag-infestation claims from isolated reviews
    • Aggressive placement/insurance marketing and alleged harassment
    • Accessibility/navigation issues (long walks to dining, building layout)
    • Some reviewers describe an impersonal or institutional feel
    • Bathrooms/cabinets/appliances in need of repair or outdated
    • Limited or unengaging activities noted by some families
    • Inconsistent housekeeping quality and laundry room complaints
    • Perceived value decrease after price increases or management changes
    • Slow or ineffective response from corporate management
    • Allegations of false claims (e.g., 24-hour care) in some reviews

    Summary review

    Overall sentiment across reviews for Garden Ridge is mixed but leans positive around staff warmth, the campus environment, and apartment size, while showing recurring operational, dining, and management challenges. A majority of reviewers praise the people who work with residents daily — caregivers, nurses, dining staff, and some administrators are repeatedly described as kind, compassionate, and attentive. Many families report that their loved ones became more socially engaged and benefited from the community’s activities and outings. The expansive, resort-like grounds, private patios and balconies, large apartment footprints with full kitchens, pet-friendliness (including fenced outdoor areas), and weekly housekeeping are frequently listed as tangible strengths that create a comfortable living environment.

    Care quality is a prominent theme with mixed signals. Numerous reviewers describe strong, compassionate caregiving and effective memory-care moments — with specific praise for Parkinson’s care and staff who connect well with residents living with dementia. At the same time, there are worrying accounts of medication mismanagement, missed showers, overnight check omissions, and other lapses in reliable care. Several families included serious allegations that prompted concern (medication investigations, false claims about continuous 24-hour care, and failures during assisted-living transitions). These contrasting reports indicate a variable quality of clinical and wellness services: excellent and proactive in many individual cases, but inconsistent and in some cases unsafe in others.

    Dining and food service are among the most polarizing areas. Many reviewers enjoyed meals and the social dining experience, reporting excellent or improving cuisine and a pleasant dining room. Conversely, a substantial number of residents and family members complained about inconsistent food quality, poorly executed dishes (dry meats, unappetizing salads), long waits for meals, Cold or late service, and menu choices perceived as not suited to local tastes or dietary needs (notably limited diabetes- or low-sodium-friendly options). Staffing fluctuations and corporate-driven menu planning are frequently cited as sources of inconsistency. Some reviewers reported improvements after chef changes; others noted ongoing problems that affected daily life and satisfaction.

    Facility condition and cleanliness present a split picture: the property’s exterior and grounds receive consistent praise for beauty and upkeep, with multiple reviewers describing the campus as lush and resort-like. Internally, however, many comments point to dated décor, worn carpeting, chipped paint, dirty windows, and slow or incomplete maintenance repairs. Renovations are reportedly underway in some areas, and a portion of reviewers noticed improvements; yet recurring maintenance delays (appliance issues, cabinet doors off hinges, wall damage from scooters) and inconsistent housekeeping impact perceived overall quality.

    Activities and social programming are a frequent strength when the team is engaged. Numerous accounts describe a full activity calendar, regular outings, and robust opportunities for socialization and mental engagement. Other reviewers, however, describe limited, repetitive, or unengaging programming and call out a need for more individualized or inclusive activities. This variability again echoes the theme of inconsistent execution depending on staff engagement and management support.

    Management, corporate oversight, and communication are common sources of friction. Several reviewers criticize corporate or local leadership for poor responsiveness, unclear or conflicting policies, and an institutional approach to operations. Some families described misleading marketing practices around ALTCS (Medicaid) acceptance, aggressive placement tactics, and a lack of transparency about fees (for example, the $2,500 one-time community fee and subsequent pricing increases). A number of reviewers recommend obtaining written confirmation for financial or care commitments because of prior instances of verbal promises not being honored. At the same time, individual managers and staff members (named in a few reviews) are noted as excellent communicators and problem-solvers, suggesting the experience depends heavily on specific personnel.

    Safety and reliability concerns emerge in several critical reviews: understaffing leading to long meal waits, unattended residents, wandering at night, and allegations of soiled clothing or lack of adequate hygiene for some residents. Conversely, many families report feeling secure due to attentive caregivers and 24/7 on-site support (as claimed by some reviewers). These opposing views highlight that resident safety and consistent service delivery can fluctuate and should be verified during tours and intake.

    Value and recommendation patterns are mixed but informative. Many reviewers call Garden Ridge one of the best-value options with large units, included services, and an active social environment. Others say the community is overpriced relative to inconsistent service levels, particularly when food quality, staffing, or management responsiveness decline. A sizable number of families explicitly recommend the community, often highlighting specific staff who made transitions smoother. However, there are also multiple strong negative reviews in which families moved loved ones out due to unacceptable care problems.

    Notable administrative and operational patterns to watch for: inconsistent ALTCS handling and marketing (ask for written confirmation), an occasional $2,500 community fee, variable dining performance (ask about menu planning and accommodations for dietary needs), mixed cleanliness and maintenance records (inspect apartments and common areas), and fluctuating staff-to-resident ratios that affect daily care and meal service. Given the breadth of experiences reported, prospective families should tour multiple times, speak with current residents and families, request documentation of policies (ALTCS, memory-care placement, caregiver mandates), verify staffing levels at different times of day, and get promises in writing. Garden Ridge offers many attractive features — beautiful grounds, roomy apartments, and many caring staff — but the overall experience appears to be strongly influenced by day-to-day operational consistency, management responsiveness, and recent staffing or ownership changes.

    Location

    Map showing location of Garden Ridge

    About The Goodman Group

    Garden Ridge is managed by The Goodman Group.

    Founded in 1965 by Sidney Goodman, The Goodman Group is headquartered in Chaska, Minnesota, and operates 37 senior living communities across seven states. They provide independent living, assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing, and rehabilitation services. Their mission is "to enrich the quality of life by inspiring greater well-being in every individual."

    People often ask...

    Nearby Communities

    • Photo of La Siena
      $3,825 – $4,475+4.4 (110)
      1 Bedroom • 2 Bedroom
      independent living, assisted living

      La Siena

      909 E Northern Ave, Phoenix, AZ, 85020
    • Exterior view of Maravilla Scottsdale senior living community building with a beige stucco wall and illuminated sign reading 'Maravilla Scottsdale An SRG Senior Living Community' surrounded by desert landscaping and trees at dusk.
      Pricing on request4.6 (98)
      suite
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      Maravilla Scottsdale

      7325 E Princess Blvd, Scottsdale, AZ, 85255
    • Exterior view of a multi-story senior living facility building with white walls and red-tiled roof accents. The foreground features a landscaped area with bushes and a sign that reads 'Gardens Care Scottsdale' along with a phone number. Several cars are parked near the building under a covered area.
      $2,249 – $4,000+4.1 (98)
      Studio • 1 Bedroom • 2 Bedroom • Semi-private
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      Gardens Care Senior Living - Scottsdale

      9185 E Desert Cove Ave, Scottsdale, AZ, 85260
    • Exterior view of McDowell Village senior living facility showing a building with a covered entrance supported by brick columns, surrounded by palm trees, colorful flower beds, and well-maintained landscaping under a clear blue sky.
      $5,200 – $6,500+4.7 (107)
      1 Bedroom • 2 Bedroom
      independent living, assisted living

      McDowell Village

      8300 East McDowell Road, Scottsdale, AZ, 85257
    • Exterior view of Amber Lights senior living community with a large sign displaying the name and address, surrounded by landscaped greenery, palm trees, and desert plants under a clear blue sky.
      $3,530+3.8 (57)
      1 Bedroom
      independent living, assisted living

      Amber Lights

      6231 N Montebella Rd, Tucson, AZ, 85704
    • Exterior view of Atria Rancho Mirage senior living facility with tall palm trees in front, a covered entrance, and beige buildings with tiled roofs under a clear blue sky.
      $2,895 – $6,095+4.3 (183)
      Studio
      independent, assisted living, memory care

      Atria Rancho Mirage

      34560 Bob Hope Dr, Rancho Mirage, CA, 92270

    Assisted Living in Nearby Cities

    433 facilities$4,088/mo
    350 facilities$4,026/mo
    334 facilities$4,075/mo
    325 facilities$4,043/mo
    267 facilities$4,140/mo
    322 facilities$4,056/mo
    230 facilities$3,963/mo
    119 facilities$4,076/mo
    323 facilities$3,876/mo
    125 facilities$4,064/mo
    85 facilities$4,220/mo
    84 facilities$3,757/mo
    © 2025 Mirador Living