Overall sentiment in these reviews is strongly negative with recurring, serious concerns about safety, basic care, and facility conditions, although there are isolated reports of compassionate staff and effective therapy services. The dominant themes are understaffing, inconsistent and sometimes neglectful nursing care, hazardous and unsanitary facility conditions, poor food services, medication and transfer errors, and administrative dysfunction. Multiple reviewers allege incidents that put residents at risk — missed medications, delayed pain relief, toileting and feeding neglect, and avoidable emergency transfers — while others describe positive individual caregivers and therapists who attempted to compensate for systemic failures.
Care quality and staffing: The reviews describe a pattern of understaffing, heavy use of rotating/agency staff, and high turnover. Families report slow or absent responses to call lights, nurses not checking on patients, nurses leaving medications at bedside, and dangerous lapses such as missed blood pressure medication and nearly fatal Coumadin dosing errors. Several accounts tie these lapses to worsened medical outcomes including ER admissions, dehydration, infections, severe blood-sugar events, and deaths. Conversely, a smaller number of reviews note competent, caring nurses and efficient staff; however, these positive comments are inconsistent and appear overshadowed by frequent reports of neglect and inattentive care.
Facility condition and safety: Many reviewers report serious physical plant problems — leaking roofs and ceilings, buckets catching water, black/moldy water, sewage odors, broken beds, and bed rails that are too short. These are not only comfort issues but safety hazards (e.g., broken beds, short rails, and self-evacuation risk). Several reviews reference outside warnings (fire department, regulatory action) and revoked services or licenses. Cleanliness complaints are frequent: dust over beds, spiders in meal trays, and overcrowded, dilapidated hallways. Some reviewers explicitly call the facility unsafe and unsanitary and urge investigation or closure.
Food and dining: Food quality is a persistent complaint: cold dinners, bland or over-salted meals, diabetically inappropriate diets leading to hypoglycemia, and unsanitary handling (staff using bare hands, odd items in food). A minority of reviewers said portions were generous at lunch or that breakfast was satisfactory, and a dietitian worked with some families, but most accounts describe poor nutrition, weight loss, and mealtimes that contributed to decline.
Therapy and rehabilitation: Rehab/therapy experiences are mixed but include a notable number of positive comments. Several reviewers praise the physical therapy department as knowledgeable, encouraging, and instrumental in recovery. At the same time, other reports say PT was inconsistent or revoked, therapists didn’t show up, or therapy was limited on weekends. This splits the picture: when therapy staff were present and engaged, they were a bright spot; when not, families felt promised services were unmet.
Communication, administration, and transitions: Families report poor communication, administrative confusion, and mishandled discharges or transfers. Examples include discharge without physician/nurse meetings, last-minute transfers back to hospitals, delayed or missing medication routings between facilities, billing for extra days, and blocked or inconsistent visitation policies. Multiple reviews say family members had to coordinate care themselves because the facility failed to notify them of deterioration or changes. There are also repeated statements that grievance processes are ineffective or absent and that administrators are unresponsive or dishonest.
Respect, professionalism, and allegations of abuse: While many reviewers single out individual caregivers as kind and attentive, others report unprofessional, rude, or racist remarks by staff, joking about deceased residents, and treating elders like burdens. There are multiple allegations of abuse or severe neglect (being sprayed in showers like an animal, left in waste, items stolen) and reports of harassment or disrespectful behavior. These accounts, combined with theft reports and lapses in supervision, contribute to families’ severe distrust.
Infection control and incidents: Several reviews describe a COVID outbreak with quarantine actions and failure to disclose outbreaks to families. Others mention suspected UTIs leading to severe outcomes and deaths. Infection control is presented as inconsistent, and reviewers attribute at least some resident harm to these lapses.
Variability and patterns: Importantly, the reviews show high variability: some long-term residents and families report good ongoing care, helpful social work, successful rehab outcomes, and staff who “cared about patients.” Yet the volume and severity of negative reports — safety hazards, neglect, regulatory concerns, and alleged life-threatening medication errors — create a consistent pattern of systemic problems. Positive experiences appear tied to specific staff members or transient circumstances, whereas negative experiences are numerous, cross-cutting, and involve structural issues (staffing, building maintenance, administration).
Recommendations based on patterns: Families should be cautious and verify current regulatory status, staffing levels, and recent inspection reports before placement. Prospective families should ask about nurse-to-patient ratios, turnover rates, how they manage medication reconciliation and transfers, infection-control protocols, and procedures for call-light response and overnight monitoring. If placing a loved one temporarily, frequent visitation and a dedicated advocate on-site can help identify issues early. The reviews indicate the facility may have capable individual caregivers and therapists, but systemic problems — unsafe physical conditions, staffing shortages, inconsistent medical oversight, and administrative dysfunction — create significant and documented risks for residents.
