Overall sentiment in the reviews of Paintbrush Assisted Living is strongly mixed but leans positive: many families and residents praise the facility for its staff, aesthetics, food, activities, and amenities, while a notable minority report serious care and safety concerns. The most consistently applauded aspects are the warm, engaged caregiving teams and the campus itself. Multiple reviews highlight staff described as friendly, compassionate, and attentive; specific leaders (including memory care directors and activity directors) receive high praise and are credited with delivering life-changing support for residents and peace of mind for families. The campus is repeatedly described as beautiful, resort- or mountain-vibe, and well maintained, with thoughtful design touches (barista cafe, pizza oven, courtyards, hummingbirds, theater, salon, fitness rooms, dog park) that contribute to a hotel-like, homey ambiance.
Dining and activities are frequent strengths in the majority of accounts. Many reviewers report restaurant-quality meals, varied monthly menus, off-menu options, flexible dining schedules, and a strong social dining environment. Activity programming is extensive in many descriptions: bingo, crafts, dancing lessons, live music, happy hours, field trips, shopping and restaurant outings, gardening clubs, movie nights, and veteran events are commonly mentioned. Transportation services, on-site therapies, and regular outings reinforce a busy social calendar that keeps residents engaged. Apartments are also described favorably: roomy private studios or one-bedroom units, private bathrooms, some with kitchenettes, roll-in showers, accessible designs, and regular laundry services.
Despite these strengths, there are recurring and significant concerns that appear across a meaningful number of reviews. Staffing levels and clinical coverage are the most frequent operational worries. Multiple reviewers mention understaffing, staff turnover, and times when no RN was on site. Related to those issues are reports of missed medications, delayed responses to illness or fever, dehydration, significant weight loss, UTIs, falls, and poor documentation or handling of medical needs. A few reviewers reported severe negative outcomes for residents that led to transfers out of the community and improvement after removal. Medication security and emergency preparedness (CPR, timely medical attention) are also questioned in several accounts.
Memory care receives polarized feedback: some families call the memory care team lifesaving, deeply compassionate, and highly competent, while others report that memory care staff were undertrained or that the unit experienced outbreaks, inappropriate dietary practices (concerns about meals and choking hazards), and inconsistent daily care. Several reviews describe dramatic changes in quality tied to leadership transitions or when key staff members (like activities directors or memory care directors) were on leave. Reviewers sometimes observe a strong initial intake/tour and smooth admission process but then describe communication gaps, lack of follow-up, or diminished service after move-in, indicating variable consistency in management and operations.
Security-specific concerns appear in a subset of reports and are important to note: there are direct mentions that doors were left open, enabling wandering and in one case thefts. These accounts raise safety concerns for residents with cognitive impairment. Some reviewers also reference state or local board complaints and investigations, suggesting that isolated or systemic regulatory issues have been raised. Additionally, a few families report unprofessional staff behavior or poor management response when complaints were raised, while many other families praise proactive communication and responsiveness from management.
Cost and value perceptions vary. Several reviewers feel the community offers good value given the high level of amenities and care, with specific mention of veteran discounts and reported pricing around $4,800/month in one account. However, many others cite higher-than-expected costs, extra charges, recent price increases, and affordability as barriers; a few residents moved out for cost reasons. Certain clinical and dietary gaps (for example, insufficient diabetic meal accommodations and the desire for a dietitian) were flagged by some families who felt that clinical nutrition could be improved.
Patterns and takeaways: Paintbrush commonly offers an attractive, activity-rich, pet-friendly environment with a strong community feel and many standout staff who provide exceptional care. Where the community receives its negative ratings, the issues tend to cluster around staffing shortages, clinical oversight (including no RN on site at times), inconsistent care in memory services, lapses in safety practices (doors/security), and uneven management follow-through. Many reviewers emphasize that quality can depend heavily on who is working there at a given time—particular care leaders and activity staff draw strong praise, while their departures or absences often coincide with deterioration in resident experience.
For prospective families: the facility merits serious consideration for its environment, food, amenities, and many examples of excellent staff and memory care leadership. At the same time, visitors and decision-makers should probe current staffing ratios and clinical coverage, policies on medication security and emergency response, memory care staffing and training, recent state complaints or investigations, and how the community handles dietary accommodations and after-admission communication. Asking for recent staffing schedules, RN coverage details, incident logs, and references from current families—plus confirming contractual fees and potential extra charges—would help clarify whether Paintbrush's generally strong positives align with a given prospective resident's care and safety needs.
