Overall impression: Reviews of Infinity Care Of East Los Angeles are highly polarized but lean heavily toward serious and repeated complaints about care quality, safety, cleanliness, and management. While a number of reviewers praise friendly front-desk greetings, compassionate caregivers, and attentive nurses, an extensive and consistent set of negative reports raises substantial concerns about clinical competence, infection control, basic housekeeping, resident safety, and administrative transparency.
Care quality and clinical issues: Multiple reviewers allege inadequate clinical care, including absence of RNs on staff, delayed or ignored requests for pain management, delayed nurse callbacks, and long medication refill delays (examples include 48-hour waits). There are repeated reports of malnutrition, dehydration, urinary tract infections, and unresolved catheter problems with blood noted — all indicating potential failures in monitoring and clinical response. There are also reports that residents never met a doctor, lack of a direct physician contact, and allegations that management prioritized cost-cutting over medical oversight. Serious incidents are alleged, including a fall that resulted in a hip fracture with delayed treatment and at least one reported COVID-19 infection and death. These clinical concerns are frequent and severe in many reviews.
Staff conduct, honesty, and communication: Reviews describe a mixed staff picture. On the positive side, many families cite friendly, helpful, and compassionate staff who provide emotional support and respectful care. However, an equally large and vocal set of reviews accuses staff and management of dishonesty, including lying to regulators/insurers, alleged theft of money and personal items, clothes disappearing from laundry (with an allegation that clothing was sold to a resident), and wage-and-hour violations. There are also reports that family members were banned from care plan meetings and experienced poor communication about incidents or deaths. Several reviewers describe managers as unprofessional or despotic and accuse leadership of blaming outside providers for internal failures.
Cleanliness, infection control, and facility maintenance: Numerous reports highlight severe environmental and maintenance problems: persistent foul odors (rotten egg, urine), cockroach sightings, dirty dishes and pillowcases left in rooms, bed linens not changed, stains on walls, broken or missing window screens, holes in floors, and makeshift repairs using copper pipe insulation or electrical tape. Reviewers frequently link these cleanliness and maintenance lapses to infection control failures (including staff not wearing masks) and general neglect. These conditions contribute to an overall perception of dangerous or unsanitary living conditions for some residents.
Safety, oversight, and regulatory concerns: Several reviews raise systemic concerns: allegations of staff lying to regulators, blocking family participation in care planning, locking supply closets causing shortages, and cutting staff/resources. These patterns suggest potential organizational or oversight failures rather than isolated incidents. The presence of both very positive and very negative reviews suggests inconsistency in care quality—some families report a well-managed, clean, and caring environment, while others report neglect, abuse, or near-fatal incidents.
Dining, laundry, and daily living: Complaints about poor food quality appear repeatedly, as do reports of lost or stolen clothing and laundry issues. Housekeeping lapses (dirty dishes, soiled linens, smells) were commonly noted. Such deficits affect residents’ everyday comfort and dignity and, combined with clinical complaints, amplify concerns about overall resident welfare.
Patterns and variability: The reviews show a clear split: a subset of families and visitors describe warm, professional, and attentive care, while another substantial subset documents severe quality-of-care and safety failures. This variability may reflect differences across shifts, staff members, units, or time periods. However, the volume and severity of negative allegations — including infection-related outcomes, theft claims, and maintenance hazards — indicate recurring problems rather than isolated anecdotes.
Conclusion: The aggregated reviews paint a troubling picture for potential residents and families: serious allegations about clinical neglect, infection control lapses, unsanitary conditions, safety hazards, theft, and poor management coexist with isolated positive accounts of caring staff and good service. Given the nature of the complaints, particularly those involving clinical harm, infection spread, and alleged dishonesty, these reviews warrant caution. Prospective families should seek up-to-date documentation (staffing rosters, RN coverage, infection-control policies), perform multiple unannounced visits at different times, review state inspection and enforcement records, and ask detailed questions about staffing, physician access, incident reporting, laundry procedures, and theft prevention before making placement decisions.
