Overall sentiment: The reviews for Tarzana Health and Rehabilitation Center are highly mixed, with strong, frequent praise for the rehabilitation/therapy programs and many individual staff members, contrasted by persistent and serious concerns about staffing, communication, safety, cleanliness, and leadership. Across dozens of reviews and summary points, the most consistently positive theme is the quality and effectiveness of the physical therapy and rehab teams; many reviewers credit therapy staff with rapid functional improvement and name therapists who helped patients regain mobility. There are repeated, enthusiastic endorsements of the rehab department’s equipment, PT/OT sessions, and outcomes. Another prominent positive thread is the presence of caring, compassionate nursing and support staff—several CNAs, RNs, and individual employees are singled out by name for kindness, bedside manner, and helpfulness. When staffing and management align, families describe a welcoming, family-like atmosphere, accessible facility layout, a bright and clean environment, and an activity program that engages residents with a variety of events (bingo, crafts, music, courtyard picnics, formal dinners). The facility’s nutrition oversight and on-site nutritionist receive praise in many accounts, and some families report meals that accommodate picky eaters and contribute to patient recovery.
Care quality and staff variability: The overarching pattern is high variability in care quality. Multiple reviews praise specific staff members and departments (especially rehab), yet other reviews document opposite experiences—unreachable nurses, missed medications, neglect of hygiene, and inadequate attention to residents’ daily needs. Several reviewers reported unresponsive call buttons and delayed or absent assistance, while others noted quick wheelchair assistance and attentive CNAs. This suggests uneven staffing levels, shift-to-shift inconsistency, or variability between wings/units. Nursing leadership and charge nurses receive praise in multiple comments, but some reviewers characterize leadership as poor, blaming chaotic management for systemic problems. There are also numerous reports of language barriers and communication challenges that can impede timely care or family understanding.
Facilities, cleanliness and logistics: Many reviewers describe the facility as clean, bright, and well-maintained with accessible hallways and multiple exits. Conversely, several serious complaints allege urine smells, rooms left dirty, trash on floors, overcrowded rooms (reports of three-bed rooms), and inconsistent housekeeping. Laundry problems are a recurring concrete complaint: missing clothes, clothing swapped with other residents, and perceived theft or mismanagement of personal items. These logistical issues contribute strongly to families’ perceptions of poor value and neglect when they occur.
Safety, dementia care, and serious allegations: Safety and security are a notable area of concern. Some reviewers say the facility is not sufficiently secured to prevent wandering, and there are reports of dangerous behavioral patients and a chaotic environment. A small number of reviews raise very serious accusations—illegal drugging, battery, state findings of patient rights violations, and an administrator arrest—creating a substantial red flag that demands investigation. Several reviews mention fear of retaliation, lack of answers from facility management, and that alleged violations were not transparently addressed. Additionally, some families reported inadequate care for residents with memory loss or dementia and an apparent lack of specialized onsite medical oversight (including comments about no on-site doctor), which heightens the risk profile for vulnerable residents.
Communication, visitation, and COVID-era policies: Communication with families is another bifurcated theme. Some families praise regular phone updates, multidisciplinary coordination, and specific staff (social worker, admissions personnel) who kept them informed. Other reviewers report poor communication, missed callbacks, unresponsive front desk staff, and punitive visitation policies—especially complaints about restrictive contact rules during COVID or absolute no-exception policies. There are accounts of locked doors/front office and visitors being blocked from seeing loved ones, which amplified distress during outbreaks. The inconsistency in communication and visitation policies appears to be a major driver of family dissatisfaction when present.
Management and reputation issues: Management and leadership perceptions vary widely. Some reviewers commend specific administrators, marketers, or admission staff by name and recommend the facility. Others describe poor leadership, understaffing, and an environment that should be shut down. The presence of both strong praise and serious allegations suggests that while parts of the facility operate at a high level (notably rehab and some compassionate nursing teams), systemic management problems affect the consistency and reliability of care. State findings and allegations reported in reviews—if accurate—are especially concerning and warrant confirmation through official inspection reports.
Activities and quality of life: The activity program is often praised as lively and inclusive; reviewers report joyful, meaningful engagement for residents and multiple event types that help create a positive atmosphere when run well. Several reviews explicitly note that activities and caring staff contributed to a resident’s enjoyment, mental well‑being, and recovery.
Bottom line and patterns: The dominant pattern is polarized experiences: many families and former patients highly recommend Tarzana Health and Rehabilitation Center for its rehabilitation services, certain compassionate nurses and aides, and its generally welcoming and clean common areas. At the same time, a substantial minority of reviews report troubling problems—staffing shortages, missed care, cleanliness lapses, laundry mishandling, restrictive visitation, inconsistent communication, and even allegations of serious abuse or regulatory violations. If evaluating this facility, prospective families should weigh the strong, consistent praise for the therapy department and specific named staff against recurring operational complaints and the presence of serious allegations in some reviews. Practical next steps for families considering admission would include: (1) requesting recent state inspection reports and corrective action plans, (2) asking specifically about staffing ratios, memory care expertise, and on-site physician coverage, (3) touring the unit(s) where the patient would live to assess cleanliness and safety, (4) meeting the therapy team and nursing leadership, and (5) clarifying laundry, visitation, and communication policies in writing. These measures will help validate the strong positives many reviewers report while managing the risks highlighted by critical comments.
