Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans positive about the direct caregiving staff and the physical environment, while raising important concerns about management, medication practices, dining, and safety/health incidents. Many reviewers repeatedly praise the frontline caregivers—nurses, aides, and memory-care staff—for being loving, compassionate, attentive, and resident-focused. Multiple comments describe staff who treat residents like family, specific staff members being singled out for exceptional care, and residents who appear happy and well looked after. The facility’s cleanliness, decor, apartments, and security are also frequently praised, as are activity offerings and a positive atmosphere in several units.
However, there are significant and serious concerns raised by other reviewers that cannot be ignored. One report alleges medication mismanagement and overmedication with benzodiazepines (Xanax), including ignoring explicit family instructions, which the family links to rapid decline—bedbound status and severe weight loss. There are reports of dehydration, malnutrition, urinary tract infections, C. difficile infection, and at least one hospitalization. Those incidents suggest lapses in basic care and monitoring for some residents. Theft of personal items (clothing and jewelry) and failures to notify families after resident falls were also reported, indicating problems with accountability, documentation, and communication.
Dining and supplies show mixed feedback: multiple reviewers compliment meals and say residents enjoy dining, but others report inedible food and a lack of basic supplies such as toilet paper and soap. Staffing levels are similarly inconsistent across reviews—some families state the facility is fully staffed and residents are well looked after, while others describe short-staffing that contributes to poor care and missed basic needs. Several reviewers specifically observed fewer activities in memory care, though others praised the activity programming. This variation suggests differences by unit, time period, or individual experiences rather than uniform performance across the whole facility.
Management and communication emerge as another recurring theme with polarized views. Some reviewers describe administrators and leaders (named staff) as caring and involved, while others characterize management as egotistical, unresponsive, or unavailable, advising potential residents to avoid the facility. This inconsistency in leadership perception aligns with the safety and reporting concerns—families reporting unresponsiveness from administration were also those reporting serious care failures.
In summary, Countryside Assisted Living appears to have strong strengths in compassionate frontline caregiving, memory-care programming for many residents, and an attractive, clean, secure environment. These strengths lead many families to recommend the facility and to feel relief trusting their loved ones are in good hands. At the same time, there are nontrivial reports of medication errors, serious medical declines (dehydration, malnutrition, infections), theft, inconsistent communication after falls, and variable dining/supply standards. Prospective residents and families should weigh the positive reports about direct care staff and facility amenities against the reports of serious incidents and inconsistent management. It would be prudent for families to: (1) ask detailed questions about medication management policies and documentation, (2) verify staffing ratios and turnover in the specific unit of interest, (3) inquire about incident notification policies (falls, medication errors, hospitalizations), and (4) tour the specific memory or assisted-living unit to observe meal service, activities, and unit-level leadership. These steps can help detect whether the particular unit they are considering aligns with the positive experiences many reviewers reported or with the concerning incidents others described.
