Overall sentiment across the reviews is strongly mixed, with a substantial split between reviewers who praise A Caring Manor II for its homelike atmosphere, compassionate staff, and small, intimate setting, and reviewers who report serious concerns about medication handling, management competence, and inconsistent care quality. Many families describe the facility as warm, welcoming, and family-like: staff are frequently characterized as friendly, attentive, and supportive, with several reviewers noting consistent caregivers, individualized attention, successful transitions into the home, and helpful hospice coordination. Multiple reviews highlight positive physical attributes such as private rooms, outside-access bathrooms, a bright kitchen, a large fenced yard with animals, and a clean or spotless environment. Some families specifically praise home-cooked meals, available grooming services, daily activities, and flexibility in staffing and care options, and mention that the facility is bonded/insured and works with VA and state coverage.
At the same time, a distinct set of reviews describe troubling operational and care-safety issues. The most serious and repeatedly cited problems involve medication management: reviewers reported medication mixups and at least one instance where staff allegedly refused to administer pain medications prescribed by a hospice physician, leaving a resident in severe pain. Other safety-related concerns include poor monitoring (no phone call when a resident became unresponsive and staff reportedly did not check on him), a report of an unknown substance in a resident's cup, and restrictive or troubling interactions with staff during emergencies (family members told they could not stay or sleep with the resident). These reports indicate potential gaps in clinical oversight, communication, and respect for family involvement.
Management and staffing are another frequent theme of variability. Some reviewers applaud a consistent caregiver and good communication from management, while others describe the manager as hands-off, confused, or unaware of caregivers’ activities. There are accounts of argumentative staff and even allegations that the owner lied. Staffing shortages or limited local staff availability are mentioned, which may explain inconsistent experiences across different stays. This variability extends to housekeeping and maintenance: while multiple reviews call the facility spotless, other reviewers mention dusting not being done, vacuuming required, an odor in the home, and a leak in a bedroom. The conflicting reports suggest that cleanliness and upkeep may depend heavily on staffing levels and who is on duty.
Food and dining also show mixed feedback. Some families report nutritious, home-cooked meals and a satisfactory menu, while others complain of low-nutrition offerings—canned foods, lack of fresh produce, and failure to follow prescribed diets (for example, a heart-healthy plan). One reviewer was told they could bring their own fresh produce at their own cost. Activities receive similarly divergent comments: many reviews reference several daily activity options and an active social life, while others say there are not many activities or that activity participation is left to residents. The presence of animals and a yard is consistently noted as positive, particularly for residents who enjoy pets and outdoor space.
Other recurring points: the facility’s small size and private-pay structure are double-edged—some appreciate the intimate setting and personalized attention, while others see private-pay pricing as a negative. Noise and supervision of visitors are occasional problems (loud, unsupervised grandchildren were cited). Some reviews emphasize that the facility is family-owned and local, and that certain staff (named individuals in a few reviews) were particularly caring.
In summary, A Caring Manor II elicits strong positive reactions from families who experienced attentive, compassionate, and consistent caregivers in a warm, pet-friendly, homelike environment with private rooms and outdoor space. However, there are multiple, serious negative reports that point to inconsistent care quality, problematic medication handling, management shortcomings, and lapses in communication and resident monitoring. These conflicting patterns suggest the facility can provide excellent, personalized care under certain staffing/management conditions but also poses potential risks when those conditions are not met. Prospective residents and families should weigh the consistently reported strengths (home-like setting, compassionate staff, small size, pets and outdoor areas) against the documented safety and management concerns (medication errors/refusals, poor incident communication, variable housekeeping, and staffing inconsistency) and seek specific, verifiable assurances about medication protocols, staffing continuity, emergency notification procedures, and diet/housekeeping standards before committing.
