Overall impression: Reviews for Apple Country Care Home are mixed, with a clear divide between families who feel grateful for the personalized attention and those who experienced serious problems. The home’s small size (several reviews note about six residents) is repeatedly cited as a meaningful factor: it enables consistent caregivers who can get to know residents well and provide individualized attention. Many reviewers praise the caring attitude of staff, describing them as kind, smiling, and attentive; a number of families explicitly say they feel lucky or pleased with the care their relative receives.
Care quality and staffing: A major strength highlighted is continuity of care — trusted caregivers who know residents’ needs and deliver attentive, personal support. However, a number of serious concerns counterbalance that strength. Multiple reviewers report understaffing and high turnover, and at least one review describes an abusive feeding practice and a caregiver yelling at a resident. Those specific incidents are strong negative signals that point to inconsistent supervision and variability in staff behavior. Taken together, the pattern is: when the same, well-trained caregivers are present, care can be very good; when staffing is thin or turnover is high, quality and safety appear to decline.
Facility and environment: The facility is described as an intimate, small home and is kept clean. The small residency count is consistently mentioned as a reason for closer relationships between staff and residents, but it also implies a limited institutional structure: fewer staff on site at any given time and less separation between living areas and caregiving spaces. Location is described as average — not a selling point, but not a major negative either.
Dining and daily living: Opinions about meals are mixed. Some reviewers report nutritious food, while others call the food only "so-so." This inconsistency in dining mirrors the broader pattern seen in staffing and care: some families experience consistently good service, others experience lapses. There is no mention of structured activities in the summaries provided, so it is unclear how robust the social/activity program is; the small-home model may limit formal programming compared with larger facilities.
Management, patterns, and red flags: Recurrent themes that warrant attention are understaffing, high turnover, and at least one report of abusive behavior. High turnover can undermine the relationship-based strengths of a small home and may reflect management or compensation issues. The reported abusive feeding practice and verbal mistreatment are especially serious and suggest gaps in staff training, supervision, or incident response. Even though many staff are praised as kind, these reports indicate inconsistent standards of care.
What prospective families should consider: The reviews suggest a trade-off. The facility can offer highly personalized, attentive care in a clean, intimate setting when staffing is stable and the caregivers are those praised by families. But there is documented variability in experience, with serious negative incidents reported by some families. Anyone considering Apple Country Care Home should: visit multiple times (including mealtimes), observe staff-resident interactions, ask for current staffing ratios and turnover statistics, request references from current families, inquire about staff training and supervision practices, and ask how incidents are reported and addressed. A short trial stay or a clear written care agreement and escalation plan may help mitigate risk.
Bottom line: Apple Country Care Home appears capable of delivering compassionate, individualized care in a small, clean setting, and many reviewers are pleased. However, there are credible concerns about staffing stability and at least one reported abusive incident that argue for careful, thorough vetting and ongoing monitoring if you choose this provider.
