Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but clustered around two consistent themes: a generally warm, caring frontline staff and an attractive, amenity-rich facility contrasted with operational problems (staffing, management, safety, and consistency of care). Many reviewers emphatically praise individual employees by name (Elizabeth, Rita, Stephen, Ceelee/Chantelle/Yanis, Helen, Lorraine and others), describing staff as compassionate, resident-centered, attentive and willing to go above and beyond — particularly in end-of-life care and in facilitating move-ins, transitions from rehab, and routine activities. Multiple reports describe residents as happy, rooms as a good size, and public spaces as bright, airy, and well-kept. The facility features a large garden/courtyard with walkways, library, exercise/therapy rooms, private dining, activity rooms, a barbershop/beauty shop, and on-site physical therapy — features that many families found valuable and that support a high quality of life for residents who can and wish to participate.
Amenities and social programming are frequently called out as strengths. Reviewers regularly note regular activities (music, bingo, movie nights, live music, outings) and social touches such as afternoon cookies, daily ice cream socials, and themed events (proms, dances). For many residents the community provides a sense of being known, of close-knit relationships with staff, and meaningful engagement. The proximity to hospitals and convenience for families are recurring positives, as are pet accommodations and recognition of veterans.
At the same time, dining and nutrition are an area of clear inconsistency. Several reviewers praised good, large portions, accommodating chefs, sandwiches and specialty requests, and the presence of fruit and desserts. Conversely, a near-equal number reported repetitive menus, limited choices (often chicken or fish), poor meal quality, long gaps between meals, failure of waitstaff to offer alternatives, and general disappointment with food service. This variability suggests that dining experience may depend heavily on staffing, time of day, or individual kitchen/serving teams.
Operational issues are a prominent negative thread. Many reviews cite frequent staff turnover and short staffing, which has direct consequences for laundry, housekeeping, medication management, response times to call lights, and the ability to provide consistent, personalized care. Weekend staffing and leadership were singled out as weaker, and several families reported untrained or inexperienced replacements after abrupt terminations. Administrative problems such as unresponsive transport coordination, unclear billing practices, unexpected charges, and inadequate documentation of family requests were also noted repeatedly. Some reviews recounted positive conversations with management and leadership who promised improvements, while others described management as indifferent or slow to act.
Safety and care-quality concerns are substantial in several accounts, especially in memory care. Reviewers reported night checks scheduled only every two hours, incidents in which residents were located late after falls, and situations where residents were left in soiled garments or missed meals/medications. Security lapses — such as unsecured doors, entrances accessible without keys, and access that requires passing through a smoking area — raise additional safety concerns for vulnerable residents. A number of very serious reports include allegations of neglect, staff abuse, privacy breaches, infection control problems (scabies, bed bugs, roach sightings), and hygiene lapses; while some of these may be isolated incidents, they are serious enough to be red flags that multiple families mentioned.
The reviews show a polarized view: many families offer high praise and would recommend the community because of the staff, amenities, and overall atmosphere, while a notable portion recommend caution or advise against the facility due to systemic issues. Patterns emerge where positive experiences often involve dedicated frontline staff and proactive activity/therapy teams, while negative experiences frequently correlate with staffing shortages, weekend coverage gaps, administrative turnover, and lapses in infection control or safety protocols.
In summary, The Landmark appears to be a facility with strong advantages: a welcoming physical environment, ample social and therapeutic programming, engaged frontline caregivers, and many specific staff members who have earned family trust. However, there are recurring and significant operational concerns — staffing instability, inconsistent dining and housekeeping, administrative communication and billing problems, memory-care safety lapses, occasional hygiene/pest reports, and security vulnerabilities — that materially affect resident safety and satisfaction for some families. Prospective residents and families should weigh the facility's notable strengths against these operational risks, tour multiple times (including evenings and weekends), ask for specifics on staffing ratios and memory-care protocols, request written answers on billing and VA benefit usage, and verify infection-control practices and security measures before deciding.
