Overall sentiment across these reviews is highly polarized: a subset of reviewers report excellent, even outstanding care (especially in physical therapy and from particular nursing staff), while a substantial and vocal group describe serious quality and safety failures. The result is an inconsistent portrait of West Lake Nursing and Rehab Center where the same facility is called "the best" by some and "the worst" by others. This polarization suggests wide variation in individual experiences that may be related to unit differences, staffing at particular times, or inconsistent management practices.
Care quality shows the clearest divide. Positive reports repeatedly highlight strong physical therapy outcomes and specific nurses and teams who provided compassionate, effective care. Several family members say residents were comfortable, well cared for, and that therapy went very well. Conversely, multiple reviews describe alarming lapses in basic care: patients reportedly left sitting or lying on the floor, seizure emergencies mishandled to the point of EMS intervention, alleged starvation or food scarcity, and refusal by some staff to provide care for COVID patients. Those negative accounts include concrete patient-safety incidents that go beyond dissatisfaction to potential neglect or emergency-level failures.
Staff performance and communication are similarly mixed. Numerous reviews praise "awesome" nurses, caring staff, and an engaged Director of Nursing, and some families say staff keep them well informed. However, an equal or larger number of reports describe unresponsive nurses (not answering phones or call lights), rude charge nurses, language barriers with no interpreter offered, and poor communication with families (including failure to provide medical information at discharge). Staffing shortages and staff being overburdened (e.g., caring for 15+ COVID patients) are recurrent themes; understaffing is frequently linked in the reviews to lapses in monitoring, delayed discharges, and poor emergency response.
Facility conditions and infection control are major areas of concern in the negative reviews. Repeated descriptions of roach and rat infestations, dirty hallways, broken TVs and bed remotes, communal showers, small rooms, and poor air conditioning paint a picture of inadequate maintenance and environmental hygiene in some areas or at certain times. Several reviewers explicitly state infection-control failures and COVID outbreaks with staff overwhelmed by infected patients. These environmental and infection-control complaints are serious because they directly affect resident comfort, dignity, and health.
Management, billing, and administrative issues are another persistent theme. Multiple reviewers describe billing disputes, concerns about Medicare/insurance focus, refund owed situations, excessive paperwork at discharge, and what they perceive as a financial rather than clinical emphasis. Allegations of theft by staff, lost money, unpaid wages, and claims that the facility should be reported to CMS or regulatory boards recur in the negative set. Many reviewers also characterize leadership as ineffective or "garbage," which they link to the facility’s inconsistent operations and failure to address the cited problems.
Safety and resident mix concerns also appear: reports of male patients roaming into women’s rooms, presence of psychiatric or mentally challenged patients described as "dangerous" by some reviewers, and general statements about unsafe care raise questions about supervision, placement practices, and secure environments. These safety complaints often coincide with remarks about inadequate staffing and poor leadership, amplifying the risk profile described by several reviews.
Patterns and recommendations drawn from these summaries: the facility elicits both high praise and severe criticism, so prospective residents and families should approach decisions with targeted due diligence. Verify current CMS inspection reports and staffing ratios; ask for recent infection-control records and pest-control documentation; tour the specific unit where the resident would stay (observe cleanliness, call light/TV function, and odors); ask how psychiatric or behavioral patients are cohorted; request documentation and clear policies about billing, refunds, and handling of valuables; and clarify discharge procedures and interpreter availability if needed. If safety, infection control, or theft allegations are a concern, contact state survey agencies or review recent deficiency citations before committing.
In summary, these reviews show a facility capable of providing excellent therapy and very compassionate care in some instances, but also capable of serious failures in sanitation, infection control, emergency response, staffing, and administration in other instances. The divergence in reported experiences is striking and suggests highly variable performance across time or units. Families should corroborate recent performance data and perform an on-site evaluation focused on the specific concerns raised here before making placement decisions.
