Overall sentiment across these reviews is highly mixed, with strong polarization between glowing accounts of compassionate, professional care and harsh reports of neglect, poor management, and unsafe conditions. Multiple reviewers praise particular staff members, nursing leadership, therapy teams, kitchen/housekeeping, and administration — describing attentive CNAs, excellent RNs (including mentions of DON and ADON), effective PT/OT/Speech therapy (including telemed therapists), and meaningful activity programming. These positive reviews frequently note measurable resident improvement (regained mobility, speech, independence), a welcoming, home-like atmosphere, and staff who provide peace of mind to families.
At the same time, a substantial number of reviews describe serious problems: inconsistent care quality depending on shift or specific staff, chronic understaffing, long wait times for assistance, ignored call lights, and slow or absent responses to urgent needs. There are multiple allegations of neglect: residents left in soiled linens or diapers, denied food or fluids, delayed or refused medication, inadequate wound care, and being left unattended for hours in wheelchairs or dining areas. These accounts include specific safety incidents (falls, cuts, bruises, rib injuries) and reports that medical documentation/charting was not maintained properly. Several reviewers stated they moved their loved ones out because care was untenable.
Communication and management are recurring themes. Many families report poor communication from the facility — missed or hung-up calls, no in-room phones, inadequate health updates, unresponsive front-desk or insurance/payments staff, and administrative indifference to complaints. Conversely, other reviews emphasize professional, caring leadership and a facility turnaround led by administrators and engaged staff. This suggests notable variability over time and between teams: some reviewers describe a positive change in culture and better oversight, while others experienced dismissive or cold administrative behavior, billing disputes, or slow refund handling.
Cleanliness and the physical environment likewise receive conflicting assessments. Several reviewers applaud housekeeping and describe clean rooms and good meals; others report strong odors of urine/feces, stained carpets, dirty showers, clothing and towels on floors, flooding in halls, and an overall need for a remodel. Security and property accountability are concerns in multiple reviews — missing clothing, alleged theft of blankets, and mismatched or mislocated garments. A few reviews mention police involvement or contacting Adult Protective Services, indicating some families perceived the issues as serious enough to escalate.
Therapy and rehab services are a clear strength for many residents, with multiple reviewers crediting the facility’s PT/OT/Speech teams and reporting notable functional improvements. However, other families complained of little or no daily therapy, lack of care plans, or poor reputation among medical providers. Dining is similarly mixed: several entries commend the kitchen and food, and note visitors being able to eat with residents, while others report cold meals or improper diets (e.g., diabetic diet issues) and subpar meals.
Patterns that emerge: (1) Highly variable individual experiences — excellent care and clear neglect can both be reported for the same facility; (2) Staffing and management consistency appear to be the fulcrum — when leadership, nurses, and CNAs are engaged and present, outcomes are positive, but when understaffing, turnover, or poor communication dominate, safety and basic care suffer; (3) Several serious red flags appear frequently enough that prospective families should investigate them carefully — reports of neglect, missing belongings, regulatory involvement, and hygiene/odor problems are not isolated and warrant in-person inspection and direct questions about staffing ratios, call response times, documentation practices, and incident reporting.
Recommendations for families considering Mountain View Manor: visit multiple times including evenings and weekends to observe different shifts; ask for specifics about staffing ratios, how they handle call lights and emergencies, daily therapy schedules and care plans, documentation/charting practices, and protocols for infection control and personal belongings. Speak directly with therapy staff, the DON/ADON, and the administrator about any concerns, and request references from recent families. For current residents whose families are witnessing poor care, escalate promptly to administration and consider contacting local ombudsman, Adult Protective Services, or regulatory bodies if immediate safety concerns exist.
In sum, Mountain View Manor appears capable of providing excellent, heartfelt care with strong therapy, housekeeping, and some standout staff, but there is a nontrivial and repeated set of reports describing serious neglect, communication failures, and safety/cleanliness problems. The facility’s performance seems highly dependent on staffing, leadership engagement, and specific teams; prospective and current families should perform thorough, shift-varied assessments and follow up on any concerns without delay.
