Overall sentiment: The reviews for Trinity Hill Care Center LLC are strongly mixed but trend heavily negative. Many reviewers report serious and recurring concerns about basic standards of care, safety, cleanliness, and management responsiveness. At the same time a smaller but consistent set of comments praise individual caregivers and certain programs, suggesting pockets of competent, compassionate care within a facility experiencing systemic problems.
Care quality and medical responsiveness: A dominant theme is delayed or inadequate medical attention. Reviews repeatedly allege ignored physician/surgeon orders, delayed or missing medications (including antibiotics), slow or absent responses to call buttons, and poor emergency protocols. Multiple accounts describe residents deteriorating or becoming underweight while at the facility; at least one reviewer tied decline to delays in care. While several RNs (notably Marcella and one identified as a Jamaican RN) are repeatedly praised for caring and responsiveness, nursing care overall is described as inconsistent—some nurses are kind but many CNAs and nurses are characterized as unhelpful, untrained, or negligent.
Staff behavior, culture, and management: Reviewers frequently describe a toxic workplace and poor leadership. Reports include rude, sarcastic, or disrespectful attitudes toward residents and families, accusations of discrimination and racism, threats or retaliation against staff who raise concerns, and administration that is unresponsive or unavailable. Social work is reported inconsistently: some reviewers praise social workers Ashley and Alyssa for helpful interactions, while others call Ashley “horrible” and accuse the social work/administrative team of mismanagement, poor referrals, and lack of advocacy. Several reviews mention staff using phones, ignoring complaints, lying, or otherwise failing to communicate transparently. These cultural and leadership issues are presented as direct contributors to lapses in resident care and safety.
Facilities, cleanliness, and supplies: Cleanliness, sanitation, and facility maintenance are frequent and serious concerns. Reports include urine and other strong persistent odors, rodent droppings/mice, insects, broken equipment and beds, unclean wheelchairs, and inadequate housekeeping (rooms not cleaned for days). Reviewers also note a lack of basic supplies—insufficient linens and towels, lack of gloves and sanitation supplies, no A/C in some cases—and equipment mismanagement that could compromise safety. Maintenance and rehab staff are among the few groups singled out positively, suggesting that certain operational teams are trying to keep things functional despite broader problems.
Food and daily living: Food quality and dining services are commonly criticized: meals described as overcooked, salty, cold, or gross, and not meeting resident needs. Reviewers also describe inadequate assistance with activities of daily living—showering, toileting, and mobility help—citing CNAs who do not help and unsafe transfer/fall incidents. Some families feel residents are treated like a number, with an institutional, warehouse, or prison-like atmosphere rather than a person-centered environment.
Safety, privacy, and visitation: Safety issues extend beyond clinical care to visitor and resident experience. Strict and supervised visitation policies, reported surveillance of visits, and restricted physical affection (no hugs) are described by family members as dehumanizing. Allegations of HIPAA/confidentiality violations and staff lying about residents’ conditions further erode trust. Incidents such as theft in the parking lot and claims of insurance or financial wrongdoing were also raised, compounding safety and ethical concerns.
Rehabilitation and positive aspects: Amidst these criticisms, multiple reviewers emphasize the presence of functioning rehabilitation services and some genuinely caring clinicians. Several families reported good experiences with post-accident or post-operative rehab, and a small number of nurses, CNAs, and social workers provided helpful, compassionate care. One reviewer noted an HIV program and other specialized services that were viewed positively. These positive mentions suggest the facility has capable staff and programs, but that their impact is uneven and undermined by systemic problems.
Patterns and recommendations: The reviews paint a picture of a facility with significant systemic issues—poor leadership, inconsistent staffing and training, serious sanitation and safety lapses, and cultural problems that include discrimination and retaliation. At the same time, the repeated praise of specific individuals (RN Marcella, the Jamaican RN, and a few social workers and rehab staff) indicates there are skilled caregivers whose practices could be amplified through better management, training, and accountability. Reviewers repeatedly say the place could improve markedly with stronger policies, better staffing, improved cleanliness/supplies, clearer communication, enforced emergency protocols, and less restrictive, more humane visitation rules.
Bottom line: Families and reviewers give Trinity Hill Care Center LLC many warnings and do not recommend it in its current state, citing safety, sanitation, and care concerns as their primary reasons. However, the presence of dedicated rehab staff and several praised clinicians suggests the facility has the components necessary for better performance if systemic administrative, staffing, and environmental issues are addressed. Immediate priorities based on the reviews would be fixing cleanliness and supply problems, enforcing clinical orders and emergency responsiveness, improving staff training and supervision, addressing workplace culture and discrimination, and restoring transparent, compassionate family communication and visitation practices.
