Overall sentiment in these reviews is strongly mixed and highly polarized: a substantial portion of reviewers praise the people, therapy outcomes, and personalized attention, while a number of other reviewers describe serious neglect, cleanliness problems, and safety lapses. The pattern is not uniform — many families report excellent, compassionate care and effective rehabilitation, whereas other families document concrete and alarming failures in basic care and safety.
Staff and caregiving form the clearest divide. Numerous reviews highlight staff who are friendly, warm, and accommodating — receptionists who greet families happily, nurses and aides who learn visitors' names, and caregivers who go above and beyond to provide personalized attention. Several reviewers specifically praised the therapy department as "amazing," credited wound-care expertise, and reported patients improving and being discharged home due to effective rehab. Positive reports also emphasize communication: staff who keep families informed about progress and provide dignified, respectful care that makes patients feel at home.
Counterbalancing those positives are multiple reports of neglectful and unsafe care. Several reviews accuse nurses of being unresponsive and describe patients left soiled, left sitting in wheelchairs all night, or not given a bed. There are claims of bed sores, long delays in basic hygiene (one report cited a single shower in 20 days), and at least one description of a patient being "drugged up all day." Repeated falls and safety lapses are mentioned explicitly, and families describe feeling their loved ones were neglected or not properly monitored. These are serious safety and quality concerns raised by multiple reviewers.
Facility condition and cleanliness are another area of inconsistent experience. Some reviewers describe the building as clean, neat, and well-kept; others report dirty conditions, cockroaches, and rooms cluttered with items from previous patients. Such contradictory accounts suggest variability across units, shifts, or time periods rather than a single consistent state. Several reviewers also observed staff hanging out in halls or appearing tired, and staffing shortages were mentioned as a likely contributor to both cleanliness and care problems.
Food and dietary care receive mixed remarks: multiple reviewers enjoyed meals and reported pleasant lunches, while at least one reviewer documented a diabetic diet mismanagement incident (being given fruit juice). Admissions and discharge processes were described as smooth by several families, yet some reviews indicate that questions and concerns are deferred to administration and that families sometimes feel placated rather than heard. Visitation issues appeared in a few reviews as well, suggesting inconsistent enforcement or communication about visiting policies.
There are also isolated but serious allegations, including claims of employee theft and unprofessional behavior. Although these were not the majority of reports, they amplify the perception of inconsistency in management and oversight. Taken together, the reviews portray Sandy Ridge Center for Rehabilitation and Healing as a small facility capable of high-quality, compassionate rehab and wound care when staffed and managed well, but also vulnerable to significant lapses in basic care, cleanliness, and patient safety. The most consistent pattern is variability: families report both exemplary experiences and deeply troubling ones, often citing staffing shortages, inconsistent administration response, and fluctuating cleanliness as possible explanations for the disparity.
