Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed but leans positive on staffing, programming and the day-to-day resident experience, with recurring and strong praise for the people who work there and the community atmosphere. The most frequent positives are about the staff: many reviewers describe caregivers as warm, attentive, compassionate and personally engaged with residents. Multiple families highlight that caregivers learn residents’ names, encourage participation, preserve dignity, and provide individualized attention. Several reviews specifically call out consistent staff stability, accessible leadership, and onsite nursing/medical coverage, which contributes to families’ peace of mind in many cases.
Activities and programming emerge as another consistently praised area. The community is described as music-forward — singing, dancing, piano and live musicians are mentioned repeatedly — and reviewers report plentiful daily activities, social events, haircuts, and celebrations (for example a 90th birthday event). Pets and in-house animals (dogs and birds) are repeatedly noted as a positive factor, especially for residents who enjoy animals. Many families describe the environment as home-like, with multiple living spaces, engaging entertainment, and a bright, modern interior following renovations.
Facility features receive both positive and negative comments. On the positive side, reviewers mention a clean, bright interior, renovated rooms, easy parking, a safe neighborhood, and a convenient location. Some reviewers also appreciate a one-level layout that feels less institutional. On the negative side, there are repeated notes about unusual room configurations — including rooms without sinks, jack-and-jill bathrooms shared between multiple residents, and reports of overcrowded living areas and two beds in very small spaces. Several reviewers noted the exterior and grounds are less impressive and that there are no outdoor grounds for residents to use.
Dining and daily care show mixed feedback. Numerous reviews commend attentive personal care—regular baths, clean rooms, competent incontinence care and reliable medication administration. However, a notable subset of reviews report a decline in meal quality and inconsistent dietary accommodations. A few reviewers explicitly said food quality has gone down under new management. Cost is another frequent theme: many families find the pricing high and worry about the financial burden; one review mentioned a $4,000 signing fee.
Communication, management and consistency are areas of clear divergence. Many reviewers praise accessible, professional management and responsive staff; they describe good communication, an informative tour experience, and a director who is visible and engaged. At the same time, several reviewers describe poor communication—surprising medication changes or UTI treatments not relayed to families—and express distrust toward the facility. Some families report a perceived decline in care quality and attention after management changes, while others explicitly praise a new executive director for improvements. This suggests variability over time or differences between shifts/units.
Safety and serious concerns require careful attention. While many families feel safe and supported, there are several serious negative accounts that cannot be ignored. A subset of reviews alleges significant lapses: a case describing malnutrition and a bed-bound resident, claims of a lock-down memory care unit, lack of bedside emergency pendants and landline hookups, and memory-care residents wandering into other residents’ rooms. Understaffing is cited in some reviews and linked to falls and insufficient monitoring. These issues are not uniformly reported but are severe when they occur and indicate that oversight, staffing levels, and safety infrastructure may be inconsistent across the community or over time.
In summary, the dominant themes are that staff, programming (especially music), and the welcoming culture are real strengths at The Auberge at Scottsdale; many families report excellent, personalized dementia care and strong engagement. However, there are repeated operational concerns — some relating to building layout and shared bathrooms, others to inconsistent food quality and communication — and a smaller number of serious allegations around neglect, safety equipment, and insufficient monitoring. Prospective families should weigh the overwhelmingly positive experiences about staff and activities against the reported instances of overcrowded rooms, high cost, and the serious safety/neglect claims. Visiting in person, asking targeted questions about staffing ratios, emergency pendant availability, bathroom arrangements for rooms, recent management changes, and observing multiple shifts would help surface whether the strengths recounted in many reviews are consistent and whether the specific concerns have been addressed.
