Overall sentiment across reviews is mixed but leans positive regarding the physical environment, amenities, and many frontline caregivers. Repeated praise centers on the facility’s attractive, campus-like grounds, historic Tudor-style architecture, bright rooms with large windows or balconies, well-kept landscaping and a gated, secure entrance. Many reviewers emphasize that the community is clean, organized, and calm, with an on-site continuum of care (independent living, assisted living, memory care, skilled nursing) that is convenient for families. Multiple accounts highlight active, varied programming (outings, garden, exercise, pool, classes), good coordination with external providers (e.g., Kaiser), and an overall welcoming, home-like atmosphere that helped residents regain weight, socialize, and feel safe. Several reviewers called out staff compassion and professionalism—nurses, activities staff, and certain administrators received consistent positive mentions for being attentive, proactive, and caring.
However, there are significant and recurring negative themes that potential residents and families should weigh carefully. The most alarming pattern is a set of serious allegations concerning staff misconduct and safety: multiple reviewers claim staff theft, neglect, and abuse (examples include a fall in the shower allegedly causing bruising, a resident left in the dining room until turning blue, and even one family attributing a death to facility care). These are rare but severe allegations and contrast sharply with the many positive care reports. Food service is another major point of contention — while some residents enjoy the meals and variety, others describe food as poor, non-nutritious for seniors, or even unsafe. Specific claims include unclean food carts, incorrect or missing orders, mixed-up beverages (an incident reported where honey drinks were mixed into regular liquids leading to choking risk), and an evident hygiene problem traced by reviewers to the main chef. One name (chef Enrique) appears in multiple complaints accusing him of abusive behavior toward staff, racist remarks toward Hispanic staff, unprofessional conduct with a resident’s family, threats to fire staff, and prompting a health department complaint. These are serious allegations reported by reviewers and represent a prominent negative trend.
Staff quality and consistency are mixed: many reviewers praise friendly, helpful, and compassionate caregivers and single out outstanding individuals (including a knowledgeable Memory Care Activities Director and specific nurses). Yet other reviewers report unresponsive, uncaring, or even rude nursing staff with a few nurses named negatively. Language barriers are repeatedly noted — several Spanish-speaking families describe mismatch or difficulty communicating with some nursing staff, which they say negatively impacted care. Staffing levels and management responsiveness show variability too: some families appreciate timely calls, ongoing communication, and attentiveness, while others recount rude admissions staff, poor management follow-through, hung-up calls, and perceived arrogance from administrators. Billing and administrative practices are another area of concern for some reviewers, who allege pressure to move residents, opaque or questionable billing, and increased rates tied to transfers into the Skilled Nursing Facility.
Facility logistics and design receive praise for the most part, but there are specific shortcomings to note. Memory Care is frequently described as well-run and odor-free with one-on-one attention, but reviewers warned that wheelchair access is limited in Memory Care and transfer to the SNF building (which some described as more hospital-like) may be required for accessible care. The campus’s bi-level layout has been mentioned as causing staff to be split between levels, which could affect response times. Other operational grievances include limited shuttle services, occasional temperature control problems in rooms, and variable food/service interactions (incorrect orders or missing items).
Given the polarizing nature of these reviews, a few clear patterns and recommendations emerge for prospective residents and families. First, the property and amenities are a definite strength: tour the grounds and rooms to confirm noise, HVAC, and cleanliness meet your expectations. Second, ask directly about dining oversight, menu planning for senior nutrition, food safety protocols, and whether any complaints (including health department actions) have occurred recently. Third, inquire about staffing ratios, language capabilities of nursing staff (especially if Spanish is preferred), training for dementia care, and the facility’s processes for reporting and investigating incidents. Fourth, for residents who use wheelchairs, inspect Memory Care accessibility and ask how transfers to the SNF are handled. Finally, check billing transparency and policies around transfers to Skilled Nursing to avoid surprises.
In summary, St John of God Retirement & Care Center receives substantial praise for its setting, many compassionate caregivers, range of amenities, and active lifestyle offerings. At the same time, there are repeated, serious complaints — particularly concerning food service safety and hygiene, alleged misconduct by specific staff, instances of neglect or poor clinical follow-through, language barriers, and inconsistent management responsiveness — that warrant careful, specific inquiry during a tour and reference checks. Families who prioritize a beautiful campus, structured activities, and a generally caring staff may find it an excellent fit, but those concerned about clinical consistency, nutrition/hygiene, or administrative transparency should investigate those areas thoroughly before deciding.
