Overall impression: Reviews of McClure Post Acute are strongly mixed, with a significant number of highly positive accounts praising therapy outcomes, individualized attention, cleanliness, and compassionate staff, alongside a smaller but serious set of negative reports describing safety lapses, communication failures, and management accountability problems. Many reviewers describe outstanding clinical and rehabilitative care, while others recount troubling incidents that led families to file formal complaints and warn others. The most frequent positive themes are excellent therapy teams, kind and attentive caregivers, cleanliness, and good leadership responsiveness in many cases. The most consequential negative themes include lapses in safety (particularly around feeding and basic care), ineffective communication, unresolved property/laundry issues, and allegations of unprofessional or abusive staff behavior.
Care quality and clinical services: A recurring strength across many reviews is the facility’s therapy and clinical capabilities. Multiple reviewers explicitly called out exceptional physical and occupational therapy teams, timely rehabilitative progress, and specialized wound care (including successful woundVac management). Several accounts report complete recoveries and measurable mobility improvements. In many of these cases, the nursing staff and CNAs are described as attentive and responsive, with quick call-light response times and thorough follow-through. These positive clinical outcomes and attentive bedside care are primary drivers of the strong recommendations from a large subset of families and residents.
Staff, culture, and interpersonal interactions: Reviews show a clear bifurcation. Many reviewers praise individual staff members by name (e.g., CNAs Rose and Bizzu; staff such as Daisy, Cece, Kristen, Cecilia) and describe an environment that feels warm, hospitable, and family-like. Leadership, including the administrator and director of nursing (DON), is credited in numerous reports for accessibility and for addressing concerns. Conversely, a number of serious complaints describe unprofessional behavior, nurse bullying, mistreatment of patients, restricted resident freedoms, and even alleged retaliation. Several reviews indicate that specific staff or management were unresponsive or difficult to reach, especially during admissions or when raising concerns. This mixed pattern suggests variability in staff performance and possible inconsistencies in culture or training among shifts or teams.
Safety, adherence to care plans, and regulatory concerns: Although many positive reviews highlight safe and competent care, the negative reviews contain several clinically serious allegations: feeding practices that allegedly used inappropriate thin liquids risking aspiration, failure to follow explicit care notes, delayed toileting and diaper changes, unsanitary cleaning practices (dirty towels), and loud/noisy conditions that distressed dementia patients. Some families reported having to relocate patients or escalate issues to higher management and regulators; at least one review mentions filing a formal complaint with the California Department of Public Health. In one instance an administrator issued an apology and a gift card, but the core issue of missing clothing reportedly remained unresolved. These safety- and compliance-related complaints are fewer in number than the positive reports but are highly significant given their potential impact on vulnerable residents.
Facility cleanliness, environment, and amenities: The facility is frequently described as clean, well-maintained, and organized; multiple reviewers used terms like immaculate and praised prompt repair work and efficient interdepartmental coordination. Reviewers also report a home-like environment, pleasant staff demeanor, and active engagement activities that make residents feel comfortable and entertained. However, this positive consensus is tempered by reports of unsanitary practices and spotty housekeeping in specific instances — notably reports of dirty towels and cleaning lapses — indicating inconsistencies in environmental services or quality control.
Dining and nutrition: Opinions on food are polarized. Several reviewers praise the dining options, noting wide selections, dietary accommodations, tasty meals, and the ability to accommodate DoorDash orders. Others report dissatisfaction: complaints about canned or high-salt food, too many sweets, and meals that are not diabetic-friendly. These conflicting accounts again point to uneven experiences that may vary by diet plan, staffing, or timing.
Communication and responsiveness: Communication is another area of strong divergence. Many families report responsive staff, helpful social workers and case managers, and leadership that listened, visited, and implemented corrective plans. Other reviewers found the admissions director and social worker unresponsive, experienced long phone hold times, and felt ignored when raising clinical or logistical issues. Several reports describe management visits and promises to improve, and in some cases reviewers updated their ratings upward after leaders intervened. But unresolved issues (e.g., missing clothing, ongoing safety concerns) led others to escalate matters outside the facility.
Patterns and recommendations: The preponderance of positive comments centers on therapy efficacy, individualized attention from staff, cleanliness, and a welcoming atmosphere. Yet the negative reports — especially those describing potential clinical harm, lack of adherence to care plans, and unprofessional conduct — are serious and require attention. These mixed signals suggest variability in service quality that could be driven by staffing levels, shift-to-shift differences, training gaps, or management oversight inconsistencies. For prospective residents and families: if considering McClure Post Acute, weigh the many strong testimonials about therapy and recovery highly, but also exercise due diligence. Ask about feeding protocols, check staffing ratios, request documented care plans and adherence tracking, get assurances about laundry/property handling, and establish clear communication channels (primary contact person, escalation steps). Families should monitor care closely, visit across different times/shifts, and be prepared to escalate to facility leadership or regulatory bodies if safety or dignity concerns arise.
Conclusion: McClure Post Acute receives a substantial number of very positive reviews focused on clinical excellence, compassionate staff, cleanliness, and successful rehab outcomes. However, a smaller but impactful set of reviews reports serious problems including safety lapses, poor accountability, communication breakdowns, and allegations of mistreatment. The facility appears capable of delivering excellent care for many residents, but experiences can vary markedly. Close oversight by families, clear communication with staff, and prompt escalation of any red flags are prudent steps to help ensure a positive outcome.
