Overall sentiment about Windsor Gardens Convalescent Center of Long Beach is highly mixed and polarized. The reviews present a facility with many real strengths — a pleasant exterior setting, generally very clean common areas, several useful on-site services (mobile X-ray, beauty parlor), an active activities program, and a number of staff members who are described as compassionate, thorough, and professional. Multiple reviewers singled out individual employees (notably Lisa Turner in administration, lead RN Terry, and CNA Luz) for going above and beyond, helping with hospital-to-facility transitions, insurance paperwork, and clear communication. Some families report excellent therapy services that visibly improved mobility, attentive CNAs, and a warm, family-like atmosphere. Several reviewers note recent management changes and administrative hires that appear to be moving the facility in a more positive direction.
However, the positive reports sit alongside numerous and serious negative accounts. A recurring theme is inconsistent care quality that varies greatly by shift and by individual caregivers: while some staff are praised as excellent, others are accused of neglect, rudeness, or unprofessional behavior. Multiple reviews describe dangerous or neglectful incidents — ignored calls for help, patients left in soiled diapers for hours, delayed response resulting in infections or emergency-room transfers, and unsafe equipment (beds). These safety and hygiene concerns are among the most significant complaints and have led some families to advise strongly against the facility.
Staffing and communication problems emerge repeatedly. Reviewers describe overwhelmed or understaffed shifts, long waits for basic assistance (pillows, help with toileting), phone system outages, and poor or inconsistent communication from administration and social workers. There are also several reports of lost clothing and belongings, broken washing machines, and lapses in personal hygiene support (no bathing for extended periods). Families reported being kept at arm's length with visitation-by-appointment rules or being asked to remain outside or behind a glass door, which exacerbates communication frustrations. A few reviews specifically mention unprofessional behavior from named staff (for example, Angelica Melendez) and receptionists, and at least one report of a family being told to stop calling — all of which point to trust and attitude issues in some interactions.
Dining and therapy services are described inconsistently. Some reviews praise the dining room and dietary accommodations, while others describe very poor meals — even mentions of fast food being served during renovations — and report having to bring their own food. Therapy is similarly variable: some residents report very effective, therapy-led mobility improvements and robust rehab services, while others say therapy was minimal (roughly two hours per week) or effectively absent, with no clear recovery plan or surgeon referrals. These disparities suggest uneven service delivery depending on the patient, insurer, or timing of the stay.
Facility amenities and environment are a relative strength: the campus is described as attractive and park-adjacent, with large rooms and clean common areas. Activities offerings are a consistent positive for many residents, with music therapy, bingo, social nights, crafts, movies, and chair exercise mentioned. Yet even cleanliness reports are mixed: while many note a generally very clean, odor-free interior, isolated but serious incidents of unsanitary personal care were reported and are troubling given infection risk.
A clear pattern across reviews is variability over time and between units. Several reviewers contrast a previous period of professional, caring nurses with a more recent decline in attitude and performance, while others note that recent administrative hires and management changes are beginning to improve service. This suggests that the facility may be in transition: some families see improvements under new leadership (better communication, more responsive administration), while others continue to experience unresolved issues. Memory care in particular receives notable criticism from multiple reviewers, while some indicate the nursing/rehab sections are less problematic.
In summary, Windsor Gardens displays real strengths — attractive grounds, useful on-site services, a robust activities program, and many individual staff members who deliver high-quality care. At the same time, there are multiple and serious concerns about inconsistent care, understaffing, poor hygiene practices in some cases, questionable meal quality at times, and communication/administrative lapses. Prospective families should weigh these mixed reports carefully: ask specific questions about current staffing levels, nurse-to-resident ratios, infection-control practices, therapy schedules and minutes per week, visitation policies, and how the facility handles lost items and billing/insurance transitions. If possible, meet the care team (including the administrator and lead nurse), tour the memory care unit if relevant, and seek recent references from current families to confirm whether the recent administrative changes have produced sustained improvements.
