Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans positive about the physical plant, amenities, and the frontline caregiving staff, while raising consistent and significant concerns about management, clinical oversight, staffing levels, and certain safety/quality issues. Many families praise the Peaks at Old Laramie Trail as a new, bright, hotel-like community with attractive architecture, well-maintained grounds, and plentiful common spaces. Amenities that are repeatedly mentioned positively include multiple dining areas, a hair salon/barbershop, theater and activity rooms, fireplaces and gathering spaces, walking paths, and a fenced pet area. Rooms are frequently described as bright and spacious with large windows and good built-in storage. The facility’s newness and polished appearance are a clear strength and often cited as part of the community’s appeal.
Caregiving staff receive a large number of favorable comments: residents and families commonly describe caregivers as kind, compassionate, patient, and attentive. Numerous reviewers note staff who remember residents’ names, engage lovingly with them, and run a creative activities calendar with a dedicated events planner. Many testimonials emphasize strong relationships between caregivers and residents, family-like rapport, successful transitions for some residents, and helpful move-in support. Dining is another recurring strength for many reviewers — several describe the food as good to outstanding with a broad menu, healthy options, and servers who assist with meal selection and provide team support at dining. Weekly housekeeping and regular social meals are often appreciated and increase the perception of value.
Despite these strengths, there are substantial and recurring operational concerns that cannot be overlooked. Chronic understaffing, especially on evening shifts (commonly noted 2–10 PM), is one of the most frequent complaints and reportedly impacts the availability of activities, timeliness of responses to calls, laundry and hygiene care, and overall resident supervision on some shifts. Multiple reviewers describe inconsistent care quality depending on staff on duty. Several serious incidents are described in the reviews: reported hydration and UTI-related issues leading to ER visits, extended hygiene neglect (allegations of residents not being bathed for 30+ days), missing items and alleged theft, and at least one report of unsecured sharp objects left in the memory unit. These reports raise questions about clinical oversight and day-to-day safety practices in parts of the operation.
Memory care experiences are notably mixed. Some families call the memory care unit a “great” option with attentive, loving caregivers and a stimulating schedule. Others say the memory care side lacks a registered nurse, adequate dementia-specific training, meaningful stimulation, and readiness for higher-acuity or end-of-life needs. Multiple reviewers explicitly said the community is not set up for end-of-life care or residents with high medical needs and that an advocate or family involvement is necessary to ensure appropriate care. The lack of on-site skilled nursing and reports about nursing leadership lacking clinical knowledge in geriatrics are important themes; families concerned about medical complexity should confirm clinical staffing levels before committing.
Management, administrative responsiveness, and transparency are areas of repeated criticism. Reviews mention high turnover in leadership, poor communication with families, a perceived lack of empathy after serious events (including death), and in some cases reportedly aggressive or predatory billing/financial practices. Several families allege that care conferences and billing processes have been used to increase rates without clear benefit, and there are reports of pressured discharges and inadequate notice. These administrative concerns are severe for families and, along with inconsistent responses to complaints, have led some reviewers to advise caution or avoidance.
COVID-related feedback is mixed: some reviewers felt the community was initially professional and COVID-conscious, but several reported a lengthy outbreak (2.5 months) and observed staff not wearing masks in staff-only areas. Security practices are generally described as solid (alarms on doors, front desk greeting), but scattered reports of theft, missing items, and unsecured potentially dangerous items in memory care undermine that perception and should be investigated during a tour.
Patterns and recommendations based on review themes: the Peaks appears well suited for residents seeking a new, attractive environment with a robust social calendar and responsive, loving caregivers in routine assisted living or lower-level memory care. However, families should exercise caution and do detailed due diligence for prospective residents with higher medical needs, complex dementia behaviors, or end-of-life requirements. Key items to verify in person or with management before a move: current staffing levels and ratios for all shifts (particularly evenings), presence and availability of licensed nursing in memory care, formal dementia training and supervision, protocols for bathing/hygiene and laundry handling, incident reporting and security measures, billing transparency and contract terms (including discharge notice policies), and how the community handled recent COVID outbreaks.
In summary, many reviewers praise the physical environment, amenities, and especially the direct-care staff and activities team. At the same time, recurring operational, clinical, and administrative issues (understaffing, mixed memory-care readiness, safety lapses, and management/communication problems) create a split picture. Prospective families should weigh the strong positive aspects against the documented negative patterns, ask targeted questions on tours, seek references from current families, and plan for active advocacy on behalf of any resident placed at the Peaks, particularly if medical complexity or end-of-life care is anticipated.
