Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but polarized: a large number of reviewers laud the community for its warm, compassionate staff, attractive renovated spaces, strong rehab and therapy offerings, and an active social calendar, while a smaller but serious cluster of reviews raise alarming safety, regulatory and care‑quality concerns. The positive commentary is consistent and detailed: many families and residents describe staff who go above and beyond, a welcoming admissions and ambassador program that eases transitions, beautifully renovated apartments and dining rooms, strong culinary experiences (often described as gourmet or "cruise‑ship" quality), and a broad continuum of care from independent living through skilled nursing and short‑term rehab. Amenities such as the pool, exercise rooms, chapel services, music and entertainment programming, and transportation services are repeatedly praised, as is the strong sense of community and frequent social activities that keep residents engaged.
Staff and resident relations receive overwhelmingly positive mentions in many reviews: reviewers highlight long‑tenured caregivers, attentive directors, and specific staff members who are credited with solving practical problems (e.g., arranging equipment delivery, expediting admissions, personally delivering meals). Multiple accounts emphasize smooth move‑ins, effective planning for out‑of‑state transitions, helpful tours, and a generally family‑oriented culture. The rehab and therapy programs are a recurring strength — in‑house physical therapy, successful short‑term rehab outcomes, and coordinated care are cited as reasons families felt confident referring others.
However, the reviews also reveal a cluster of serious and concrete concerns that materially affect resident safety and quality of care. Several reports allege critical lapses in nursing care: missed two‑hour skin checks, failure to turn residents with pressure sores as required, lack of feeding assistance, and delayed responses to nurse call lights. There are specific, alarming incident reports including medication mismanagement and altered prescriptions, physical safety concerns (instances of a resident being pushed), and claims of inadequate post‑heart‑attack care. These allegations are not isolated complaints about service level — they include failed state inspections with fines and an active abuse/neglect lawsuit, which signal regulatory scrutiny and potential systemic problems in some units or time periods.
Operational and management issues are a recurring theme. Several reviewers report short‑staffing leading to housekeeping cutbacks, slower call responses, and occasional lapses in cleanliness (sticky floors, chairs with food residue). There are also complaints tied to ownership/management change (Watermark) that some reviewers connect to cost increases, perceived corner‑cutting on meals, and changes in staffing levels. Specific infrastructure failures are mentioned too: HVAC outages affecting particular rooms, a clogged toilet left unresolved, and even trash bags dumped in a parking lot for days — concrete events that contrast sharply with other reviewers’ descriptions of a well‑maintained facility.
Dining receives mostly positive marks but with variability: many reviews praise gourmet meals, fine‑dining options, and excellent presentation, while others report cold or wrong meals, smaller portions over time, or meals that caused illness. This split suggests inconsistent food service quality, perhaps tied to staffing or management changes. Housekeeping and maintenance are similarly bifurcated — many reviews note excellent cleanliness and renovations, yet others document housekeeping shortfalls and maintenance delays.
A notable pattern is high variability between accounts: a large majority describe an excellent, caring community with strong amenities, whereas a smaller but consequential minority report critical safety and care failures. This contrast suggests either variations by unit, shifts over time (for example, after ownership or staffing changes), or uneven performance across departments (e.g., dining and admissions vs. nursing/skilled‑nursing). For prospective residents and families this means due diligence is especially important: ask directly about current staffing ratios, recent state inspection results, any active complaints or legal actions, medication management protocols, and how the community handles pressure‑sore prevention and call light response times.
In summary, St. Andrew's Village appears to offer many of the features families seek — attractive, renovated living spaces, robust therapy and rehab offerings, abundant activities, and a generally warm, community‑focused staff — but there are non‑trivial and specific reports of serious safety, clinical, and operational issues that must be investigated. The positive experiences around hospitality, dining, and social life are compelling; however, the safety‑related allegations (missed care, medication errors, failed inspections, and an active lawsuit) are significant and should weigh heavily in any decision. Recommended next steps for interested families: visit multiple times (including evenings/weekends), tour the skilled‑nursing wing separately, speak with current residents and families about recent experiences, request the most recent state inspection and plan of correction, ask for current staffing ratios by shift, and confirm procedures for pressure‑sore prevention, medication administration, emergency response, and incident reporting.
