Overall sentiment: The reviews for Sharon Care Center are strongly mixed but lean heavily negative. A significant proportion of reviewers describe serious quality and safety concerns that include neglect, medication mishandling, poor hygiene, understaffing, and unresponsive management. Interspersed among these complaints are repeated but less-common positive comments about individual caregivers, therapy staff, and some administrative personnel. Taken as a whole, the pattern in the feedback is one of inconsistent care — a small number of staff members and short-term experiences are praised, while systemic problems are reported frequently and with high severity.
Care quality and clinical safety: Many reviewers reported neglected basic care needs and failures in clinical oversight. Common complaints include missed showers, linens and gowns not changed, food and hydration neglected, and residents left unattended at night. There are numerous and troubling reports of medication errors: delayed or omitted doses, medications left on the floor, medications taken from other patients' files, missing medications at discharge, and even suspected theft. Some families report pain medications withheld or delays over weekends, leading to suffering. Several reviewers explicitly state that conditions were harmful enough to require transfer to hospital. The absence of a consistent on-site physician and reports that nurse practitioners are not available round-the-clock are presented as contributing factors to medical mismanagement.
Staffing, behavior, and responsiveness: Understaffing is a recurring theme and is cited as a root cause for many operational failures — one reviewer explicitly stated a ratio example ('one nurse to 90 patients'), and many others describe being told the facility is short-staffed. Understaffing is linked to unanswered call buttons and phones, long delays before assistance, missed therapy sessions, infrequent showers, and inattentive night care. Beyond staffing levels, reviewers describe a range of caregiver behaviors from compassionate and attentive (notably certain CNAs and some nurses) to disrespectful, verbally abusive, or dismissive. Several reviews describe registered staff who are 'fraudulent' or 'lazy,' and multiple families say managers were unresponsive or slow to address complaints. There are also consistent statements about pressure tactics surrounding discharge and denial of patients' or families' wishes to leave, which raises concerns about resident autonomy and safe transitions.
Rehabilitation and therapies: The reviews about rehab and therapy are polarized. Some families praise knowledgeable COTAs/PTAs and report significant functional progress. Others say promised rehab was missed for days, therapy sessions did not occur, or a patient did not receive the level of rehabilitative care expected for recovery. Missed therapy was often linked to staffing shortages or scheduling/administrative disorganization.
Facilities, accommodations, and dining: Multiple reviewers describe crowded rooms (three or more residents per room) and shared bathrooms, sometimes with unsafe roommate pairings (for example, a person with dementia paired inappropriately). Room comfort issues such as poor air conditioning, hot/stuffy conditions, and noise at night are frequently cited. Hygiene concerns extend to unsanitary conditions such as trash bins near beds and general uncleanliness. Dining is another area of consistent complaint — reports of low-quality food (canned/Spam-like meals), unmet dietary needs, and overall inedible meals appear frequently. However, a minority of reviewers describe the facility as clean and the dining/housekeeping as acceptable.
Management, billing, and administrative issues: Several reviewers express frustration with management responsiveness and administrative competence. Specific administrative problems include billing errors (including charges after death), delays or refusal to reimburse for missing items, and slow complaint resolution. A number of families indicated they planned to or did report the facility to health authorities; others explicitly called for the facility to be shut down. In contrast, some reviewers singled out administrators who 'go above and beyond' and a hands-on Director of Nursing who monitors patients closely.
The overarching pattern and risk implications: The most frequent and serious themes are understaffing leading to neglect, medication management failures, and inconsistent staff behavior — ranging from exceptionally compassionate caregivers to allegedly abusive or negligent staff. These are not isolated minor complaints: reports include physical harm (ulcers, untreated pain), transfers to hospital, and allegations of medication theft and being coerced into signing discharge paperwork. The variability of experiences suggests pockets of very good care amid broader systemic problems. Cost concerns amplify the negative feedback: several reviewers feel the facility's high price is not justified by quality.
Conclusion: Based on these reviews, Sharon Care Center appears to have a fractured service profile: some staff and therapy services receive genuine praise and deliver positive outcomes, yet systemic operational and safety issues recur often enough to pose serious concerns for prospective residents or families. The dominant themes — understaffing, medication errors, neglect of personal care, poor responsiveness, and administrative shortcomings — are significant and carry potential risk to residents' health and dignity. Families considering this facility should weigh the documented strengths of individual caregivers and therapy successes against the frequency and severity of the reported safety, hygiene, and management failures. Several reviewers have escalated complaints to regulators and some recommend urgent removal of loved ones; this pattern underscores the need for careful scrutiny and verification of current conditions before placement.
