Overall sentiment is mixed and somewhat polarized: a number of reviewers praise Sheridan Manor for clean facilities, excellent meals, caring staff, and good kitchen hygiene, while others report serious concerns about pricing, staffing quality, sanitation, crowding, and the ability to meet specialized care needs. The reviews do not present a uniform picture; instead they reveal distinct positive and negative experiences that prospective residents and families should weigh carefully.
Staff and customer service: Staff-related comments range from highly positive to strongly negative. Multiple reviewers call staff friendly and caring, and one reviewer specifically praises a staff member named Lana for being knowledgeable and helpful with senior-living advice. Several reviewers say management is improving and that staff are working to get better; the owner is described as reasonable. In contrast, other reviewers report unhelpful or rude staff, especially at admissions (phone staff who won't take messages or offer callback times), which produced a negative first impression for some. There are also allegations that some nurses may be unqualified, which raises concerns about clinical competence and reliability. The pattern suggests uneven staff performance and inconsistent customer-service experiences depending on whom a family encounters.
Care quality and suitability: Opinions on care quality are mixed. A number of reviewers describe the facility as caring and say it provided the best assisted-living experience they’ve encountered, and some note the facility’s ability to work within funding constraints. However, other reviewers express serious reservations about whether Sheridan Manor can meet all care needs—one reviewer explicitly questioned the facility’s ability to care for a loved one with Alzheimer’s. Allegations about potentially unqualified nurses and reports of rude or poor staff behavior further complicate the picture. The reviews suggest that Sheridan Manor may be appropriate for residents with lower-acuity needs, but families seeking higher-level clinical support or specialized dementia care should investigate carefully and seek evidence of staff qualifications and specialty training.
Facilities and environment: Reviews show a clear split. Several reviewers praise the building as well-kept and very clean, with one emphasizing phenomenal kitchen hygiene and five-star cleanliness. Conversely, others report dirty or unsanitary conditions, overcrowding, and rooms that are overpacked or described as the size of a closet with inadequate storage. Complaints about poor air conditioning and lack of fans also appear. This divergence could reflect variability between units or wings, differences in expectations, timing (cleaning cycles), or inconsistent maintenance and housekeeping standards.
Dining and kitchen: Dining receives both strong praise and criticism. Multiple reviewers compliment the meals and specifically commend the kitchen’s hygiene and food quality. At least one reviewer, however, described the meals as poor. Given that the kitchen and meals are singled out on both ends of the spectrum, prospective families should observe mealtimes, sample food if possible, and ask about menu variety and dietary accommodations.
Management, pricing, and operations: Pricing and transparency are recurring concerns. Some reviewers perceive the facility as overpriced or even a ‘‘scam’’ in terms of pricing and profit orientation. Others, however, call the facility affordable and the owner reasonable. Admissions processes are criticized by some for poor communication and negative first impressions (phone staff not taking messages or arranging callbacks). On a positive note, reviewers report that management and staff are making improvements, indicating some responsiveness to issues.
Notable patterns and recommended next steps: The reviews indicate significant inconsistency—some families describe a nearly five-star assisted-living experience, while others report enough red flags to move on. Key patterns are (1) split impressions on cleanliness and meals, (2) inconsistent staff behavior and customer service, (3) concerns about room size, crowding, and environmental comfort (AC/ventilation), and (4) worries about clinical competency for higher-acuity or dementia care.
For anyone considering Sheridan Manor, the review set suggests concrete actions: schedule an in-person tour (including a meal), inspect specific rooms for size and storage, observe cleanliness in common areas and the kitchen, ask for documentation of staff credentials and training (especially for nurses and dementia care), request recent inspection reports and references from current families, clarify pricing and what is included versus extra fees, and assess admissions communication before committing. Because experiences appear to vary, direct observation and targeted questions will be essential to determine whether Sheridan Manor is a good match for a particular resident’s needs.
