Overall impression: Reviews for Crestfield Rehabilitation Center & Fenwood Manor are highly polarized. A substantial number of reviewers describe excellent, even life-changing, post-acute rehabilitation experiences driven by skilled, compassionate therapy teams and welcoming direct-care staff. At the same time, numerous other reviews report serious concerns about nursing care, management, food, and facility condition. The result is a split portrait: for some patients and families this facility provides excellent short-term rehab and discharge-readiness; for others it represents inadequate or neglectful care and administrative failure.
Care quality and therapy: The clearest and most consistent positive theme is the quality of rehabilitation services. Physical therapists and occupational therapists receive frequent high praise — some reviewers single out individual therapists by name (for example, Ajay in PT and Maggie in OT) and credit them with restoring mobility and enabling a safe return home. Reviewers report clear instructions, consistent messaging from the therapy team, helpful home-care guidance, and successful outcomes for many post-hospital patients. Conversely, nursing care is more inconsistent in the reviews: several reviewers describe patient, kind, and professional nurses and CNAs, while others report undertrained or lazy nursing staff, long call-bell delays, delayed pain meds, and even medication intended for another patient. There are multiple serious allegations (malnutrition, residents told to urinate in bed, two-hour bathroom delays, medication errors, and hospital readmission due to inadequate care) that point to episodic but severe breakdowns in nursing oversight.
Staff behavior and administration: Staff behavior reports vary widely. Many comments call the staff caring, dedicated, communicative, and phenomenal. Others call out rudeness, unresponsiveness (reception/secretary), dress-code violations, and managers perceived as unprofessional or hostile. Several reviews specifically criticize management or social services — including extremely negative claims such as refusal to allow contact with a dying family member, which reviewers found inhumane. Administrative issues also appear in accounts of ignored discharge orders and poor follow-through on care plans. These mixed reports indicate that resident experience may depend heavily on which unit, shift, or particular staff members are on duty.
Facility condition and amenity issues: Opinions about cleanliness and facilities are mixed but converge on an important point: the building and decor are dated. Many reviewers praise cleanliness and neatness in rooms and common areas, yet multiple reviews describe outdated bathrooms, hallways and bathrooms that sometimes smell, rooms without air-conditioning, uncomfortable beds, and an overall need for a major makeover. Parking is described positively. Several reviewers also mention limited aesthetic or structural updates and a sense that the facility is operating on tight budgets.
Dining and daily living: Dining experiences are highly polarized. Some residents and families rave about the food and even call it delicious; others call meals deplorable, cite poor dietary recommendations, and report particular incidents (for example, “baloney sandwiches for dinner”). There are also reports of residents not being fed, weight loss, and malnutrition — very serious concerns that mirror the reported nursing lapses. These contrasting assessments suggest meal quality and monitoring vary by time, unit, or staffing levels.
Visitation, privacy, and COVID precautions: Several reviewers recount restrictive COVID-era visitation rules (weekly testing, limited visiting such as once per week) and privacy issues — staff sitting where visitors can overhear private conversations. Some families appreciated the facility’s COVID precautions; others felt the visitation policy was too restrictive and poorly managed, adding stress to already difficult situations.
Suitability and cost considerations: Multiple reviewers emphasize that Crestfield/Fenwood is more appropriate as a short-term rehabilitation facility than a long-term nursing home for complex chronic conditions. Reviewers specifically warned it is not well-suited to severe chronic pain, spinal cord injuries, trigeminal neuralgia, or other complex long-term medical needs. The facility’s daily cost was called high by at least one reviewer relative to perceived value, and several comments about “money tight” or underpaid staff suggest budget constraints that may affect service consistency.
Patterns and risk signals: The strongest consistent positives are the therapy teams and the ability to rehabilitate patients to independence. The strongest consistent negatives are variability in nursing quality, occasional severe lapses (nutrition, medication, neglect), and administrative/unprofessional behavior. Taken together, the reviews suggest a facility that can deliver excellent rehabilitation care when therapy and direct-care staffing are intact, but that service quality can degrade sharply at times — especially in nursing coverage, meal monitoring, and administrative responsiveness.
Bottom-line guidance based on reviews: If a patient’s primary need is short-term, intensive PT/OT after hospitalization and family access to specific therapy staff is possible, Crestfield has many examples of strong outcomes and satisfied families. However, for long-term skilled nursing, chronic complex conditions, or families highly sensitive to consistency in medication administration and nutrition, the reviews include multiple red flags that warrant caution. Prospective residents and families should (based on the patterns in these reviews) ask explicitly about current nursing staffing levels, call-bell response times, medication-error safeguards, dietary oversight, air-conditioning in rooms, and recent management/quality-improvement actions. Visiting in person (if possible) and checking recent state inspection reports would help confirm whether the positive therapy strengths or the negative systemic issues are dominant at the present time.
