Overall sentiment across the reviews is strongly polarized but leans toward very positive for many families and caregivers. A dominant theme is consistent praise for the quality of hands-on care: reviewers frequently describe staff as warm, compassionate, attentive and genuinely invested in residents' well-being. Specific staff and leaders (including engagement and clinical leaders named by families) receive repeated commendation for responsiveness, creativity in programming, and effective communication. Many families report improved mood, social engagement and safety for their loved ones after placement, often attributing gains to abundant social interaction, individualized attention, and a wide array of purposeful activities.
Clinical and safety capabilities are a commonly-cited strength: multiple reviews highlight 24-hour on-site nursing (RNs and LPNs), an on-staff gerontologist, weekly psychiatrist visits, and available hospice/respite and day-care services. Families who emphasize those aspects feel confident in the facility's ability to handle complex memory-care needs and behavioral challenges. Several reviewers also note strong clinical coordination and transparent communication with outside medical providers, and some consider Silverado to offer better value or care compared with higher-priced competitors.
The activities program and animal therapy are repeatedly singled out as exceptional. Reviews describe a broad, engaging calendar—music, dance, yoga, gardening, art, bus outings, beach trips, social clubs (Red Hat club), newspaper reading groups, and frequent themed events. The presence of animals (therapy dogs, miniature horses, ponies and other on-site animals) is frequently credited with boosting resident morale and social participation. Many families describe a vibrant day-to-day life that contributes to residents' emotional and cognitive stimulation, and note that family members are actively encouraged to join meals and events.
Facilities and grounds receive mixed but specific praise: several reviewers note a large, attractive campus with fenced outdoor yards, walking trails, a pool and even ocean views. At the same time, a number of reviews contrast this by reporting small rooms, dated decor, worn carpets and furniture, and an overall “gloomy” or institutional feel in some areas. Renovations are mentioned as planned, which may address some concerns. There are also contradictory impressions about outdoor space—some reviewers celebrate ample grounds, while others say outdoor area is minimal—suggesting variability by building wing or changes over time.
Dining feedback is largely positive but not unanimous. Many reviewers praise balanced, varied meals and good dining experiences, including special events and cultural meals; a number of families report staff knowledge of residents' preferences. However, others cite slow or incomplete meal customization for special diets and occasional dissatisfaction with taste. Overall, dining appears to be managed well for most residents but with intermittent areas for improvement in personalization.
Critical concerns raised in multiple reviews are serious and should weigh heavily for prospective families. These include reports of undertrained aides, inconsistent follow-through from some staff, and at least a few grave safety incidents: lack of overnight monitoring, a resident left on the floor after a fall, alleged failure to notify physicians, and claims of overmedication with Ativan followed by a rapid decline or death. There are also reports of missing personal items, theft concerns, and infection/virus outbreaks. These incidents sit in stark contrast to many positive accounts and point to inconsistency in operational reliability across shifts or periods.
Cost and value are recurring themes: the community is frequently described as expensive, with high deposits, though opinions differ on whether the care justifies the price. Some families feel it is worth every penny given the quality of staff and programming; others view the costs as astronomical, especially when paired with roommate constraints or perceived institutional shortcomings.
Management and leadership receive both praise and criticism. Several reviews highlight strong, proactive leaders and helpful clinical directors who respond quickly and personally. Conversely, some reviewers report an inept nursing supervisor, inconsistent availability of staff after meals, or broken promises regarding activities or customization. This mix suggests variability in execution and occasional lapses in continuity or quality assurance.
Patterns and practical takeaways: Silverado Encinitas is consistently recognized for its compassionate, engaged staff, robust memory-care programming, extensive activities and innovative use of animal therapy; these are the facility’s strongest and most frequently lauded attributes. However, prospective families should probe specific operational items during tours and contract negotiations: ask about recent safety incidents and their resolutions, overnight monitoring and fall protocols, staff training and turnover, medication management and notification processes, infection-control history, policies for roommate placement and personal-item security, timelines for planned renovations, pet/allergy policies, and precise costs/deposit structures. Given the polarized reviews, individual experiences appear to depend heavily on unit assignment, particular staff teams, and timing; an in-person visit, reference checks with current families, and detailed written answers from leadership will help determine fit for a particular loved one.
