The reviews for Main West PostAcute Care are sharply polarized, with many families and patients praising the facility and many others reporting serious and systemic problems. On one side, multiple reviewers describe a caring, attentive staff environment with outstanding nurses and competent therapy teams that produced good rehabilitation outcomes. These positive reports highlight quick and friendly admissions, responsive social services and administration (individuals such as Laura, Jessica, and CJ are named positively), clean and well-maintained areas, engaging activities, regular checks on residents, and successful transitions home. Several reviews explicitly call the facility five-star, noting safety, dignity, and respectful, compassionate care.
On the other side, an equal or greater number of reviews allege troubling conditions and practices. These accounts describe filthy facilities, visible roaches in rooms and dining areas, and serious temperature control issues — multiple reviewers reported patient rooms exceeding 90°F and humidity around 60%, with only staff areas seeming to have adequate cooling. Some reviewers report abusive or uncaring treatment, language barriers with CNAs, and even the use of unlicensed personnel. There are allegations that residents were denied necessary hospital transfers, forcibly removed, or signed out under conditions that prevented their return, with at least one account describing an emergency hospital visit following neglect. These reports are severe enough that some reviewers call for state intervention or facility closure.
Management, communication, and operational consistency emerge as key themes explaining the polarized experiences. Several reviewers praise management responsiveness and a smooth intake process; others call out unprofessional administrators (one reviewer names Theartis Aldridge), HR mishandling, discriminatory practices, incorrect meeting times, and a lack of transparency (no working phone or email contact reported). Central supply shortages, lack of kitchen cameras, and accusations of kitchen abuse further point to concern about oversight and systems. The pattern suggests inconsistent leadership, staff turnover, or variability between shifts/units — some families encountered warm, expert caregivers and effective rehab, while others encountered neglectful, poorly supervised situations.
Dining and activities receive mixed feedback. Some residents and families praise meals, social programming, and musical events; other reviews describe food as unrecognizable or poor and explicitly request improvements to meal planning and presentation. Activities are generally reported as engaging when mentioned positively, and therapy services are repeatedly credited with positive rehabilitation results in numerous reviews.
Overall, the prevailing impression is of a facility with real strengths (compassionate staff, strong therapy, good admissions experience, and in some cases clean, well-run units) but also with serious, recurring operational failures (cleanliness/pest control, temperature control, licensing/training of staff, communication breakdowns, and alleged neglect/abuse). The divergence in experiences is stark enough that potential residents and families should approach placement with caution and perform targeted due diligence.
Practical recommendations for families considering this facility: when touring or evaluating, ask directly about current leadership and staff turnover rates; request recent state inspection and complaint history; inspect multiple resident rooms and dining areas at different times of day (including evenings and weekends) to assess cleanliness and temperature control; inquire about pest control policies and evidence of addressing infestations; verify staff licensing and language capabilities; ask how the facility manages hospital transfers and readmission policies; get written protocols for handling complaints and escalation contacts; and obtain specific names and contact information for admissions and social work staff. Given the severe allegations in several reviews, also consider contacting the state long-term care ombudsman or survey agency to check for any active investigations or citations before making a placement decision.
