Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly mixed and polarized: many reviewers report outstanding, compassionate front-line caregivers and an excellent rehabilitation program, while numerous others cite serious, recurring operational and clinical safety problems. Positive comments repeatedly highlight individual CNAs, LVNs, wound nurses, and physical therapists who delivered attentive, recovery-focused care and made families feel reassured. Staff members in resident relations and case management (often named Daravy/Daravy Perez and others) receive frequent praise for communication, problem-solving, and emotional support. The activities program and certain kitchen staff are also commonly praised. Several reviewers explicitly state they would use the facility again because of strong rehabilitation outcomes and dedicated caregivers.
However, those positives are balanced by extensive and specific complaints about system-level issues. Understaffing and inconsistent coverage—especially overnight—are dominant themes. Many accounts describe slow or absent responses to call lights, residents left in soiled clothes or urine, long waits for transfers from bed to wheelchair, and staff stretched too thin. Night shifts are repeatedly characterized as noisy and inconsistent, and multiple reviewers describe significant differences between day-shift (often praised) and night-shift care. Maintenance problems (broken bed locks, heaters that won’t turn off, unsecured toilets) and delays fixing room safety issues compound these concerns.
Clinical and safety issues are among the most severe themes. Several reviewers allege dangerous clinical lapses: PICC lines being pulled out or mishandled, hemovac and wound drainage left unassessed or unswabbed, dressings left open, and delayed wound assessments leading to infections or readmissions. Medication management problems are reported repeatedly: poor documentation, mismatches between prescriptions and medications given, and instances that reviewers felt risked overdosing. There are multiple allegations of neglect resulting in pressure injuries, surgical-site infection, or emergency transfers. These accounts indicate potential systemic failures in clinical oversight and adherence to nursing protocols.
Communication and administrative responsiveness are inconsistent across accounts. Many families report poor communication about care changes, long hold times on phone calls, unresponsive on-call doctors, and social workers who were unavailable or difficult to reach. A number of reviews describe billing confusion or coercive behavior related to finances (attempts to arrange payee control over benefits, incorrect meal charges), as well as administrative failures such as the body being released to the wrong mortuary and administrators not returning calls. Conversely, other reviewers praise specific administrators and report that corrected problems were resolved promptly when escalated, suggesting variability depending on timing, unit, or leadership presence.
Facility environment and logistics draw mixed feedback. Some reviewers describe a clean, welcoming facility with good front desk reception, while many others report odors (urine or smoke), dirty rooms, peeling wallpaper, crowding in multi-person rooms, and lost personal items or clothing. Dining receives polarized commentary: while some describe well-seasoned meals and special dietary accommodations, a large number of reviewers call the food bland, inadequate, or nutritionally insufficient—some even report billed meals not delivered and significant weight loss in residents.
There is a strong pattern of variability in experience tied to specific staff, shifts, and possibly unit assignment. Many positive reports single out named individuals and particular teams (CNA groups, PT staff, wound nurses, Resident Relations) as exemplary, while negative reports often point to temporary staff, agency hires, or specific nighttime crews as the source of problems. Several reviews mention improved conditions under new management or after raising concerns, but equally strong reports describe ongoing declines and calls for oversight or regulatory intervention.
In summary, the reviews suggest that Community Care & Rehabilitation Center can deliver excellent, compassionate, and effective care—especially in rehabilitation and when supported by engaged day-shift staff and certain nurses or managers—but it simultaneously displays recurring systemic problems that create real safety, communication, and quality-of-life risks. The most critical and actionable concerns are understaffing (notably at night), documented clinical safety lapses (wounds, lines, medication errors), ineffective communication/administration, and inconsistent maintenance/cleanliness. Families considering this facility should weigh the strong positive reports of individual staff and PT outcomes against repeated reports of neglect, variable leadership responsiveness, and clinical safety incidents. The pattern indicates that outcomes may strongly depend on unit, shift, and which staff are on duty, so direct inquiry into current staffing levels, overnight coverage, wound-care protocols, medication verification procedures, and recent regulatory history is advisable for anyone evaluating placement.