The reviews for Delaney Park Health and Rehabilitation Center are highly polarized, with many families and patients reporting outstanding rehabilitation outcomes and compassionate caregiving while a significant number of reviews describe serious lapses in medical care, communication, and safety. Positive themes focus strongly on the therapy teams, some individual staff who repeatedly get high praise, and the facility's appearance and atmosphere. Negative themes center on inconsistent nursing care, administrative and communication failures, medication and medical-supply delays, and episodes of neglect or poor clinical management.
Care quality and clinical outcomes: Therapy services (physical and occupational therapy, and some speech therapy) are one of the clearest strengths cited. Multiple reviewers credit the PT and therapy teams with substantial functional recovery — helping patients regain mobility and independence. Several staff members in therapy and nursing are singled out by name for exemplary, compassionate care. Conversely, many reviews raise grave clinical concerns: delays or omissions in medications, failure to provide oxygen or prescriptions in a timely manner, G-tube care problems, inadequate wound care leading to bedsores, dehydration, severe UTIs, and rehospitalizations. A small but serious subset of reviews alleges catastrophic outcomes tied to mismanagement (readmissions, emergency transfers, and even death). These contrasting reports indicate that while therapy is often effective, skilled nursing and medical management appear inconsistent across shifts or staff members.
Staffing, professionalism, and communication: A major pattern is inconsistent staff performance. Numerous reviews celebrate kind, attentive nurses, CNAs, administrators, and volunteers, praising a welcoming atmosphere, staff who read to patients, and leadership that checks in. At the same time, many families experienced rude or unprofessional CNAs and nurses, lengthy nurse call response times, rough handling during diaper changes or transfers, and staff who seemed overworked or inattentive. Communication problems are pervasive in the negative reviews: the facility main number reportedly often goes unanswered, there is no voicemail or in-room phone access, families cannot reach nursing stations, and case managers or directors are sometimes described as unavailable. Multiple reports describe dishonesty or miscommunication about contacting physicians — families saying staff falsely claimed to have spoken with a doctor or specialist — which intensifies distrust.
Administration, discharge planning, and operational issues: There are recurrent complaints about poor discharge planning and insurance-driven decisions. Reviewers describe abrupt or premature discharges, discharge to hospital after initial admission, discharge without proper medication coordination, and pressure to move to assisted living or accept discharges that families feel unsafe with. Several reviews document chaotic bed assignments or bed reallocation (a bed replaced or given to another patient), confusion about room availability, and billing disputes. While some reviewers praise the administrator (named Matt) and the director of nursing for being responsive, other reviewers report difficulty contacting leadership and allege that the director was unavailable during critical incidents.
Facility, dining, and activities: Many reviewers praise the physical facility as new, clean, beautifully decorated, and well-maintained, with pleasant scents, garden-view rooms, and modern therapy areas. Activity programming receives positive mentions (bingo, karaoke, parties, volunteers, frequent activities). Dining impressions are mixed: some describe gourmet, scratch-made meals and excellent catering, while others report poor meals, limited dietitian access, and unappetizing options. Room and unit conditions vary by account: while many call the facility spotless, some report odor problems (urine or smoking), leaking rooms, small shared rooms, and limited outdoor seating.
Safety and regulatory concerns: Several reviewers allege severe safety lapses and report involvement of investigators, DCF, or regulatory authorities. Specific safety issues include medication errors or delays, missed wound care, inadequate turning leading to pressure injuries, and failure to provide needed lifts or equipment. There are also repeated procedural complaints — HIPAA concerns, lack of timely physician communication, and reports that some patient placements involve unvaccinated roommates creating infection risk. These allegations are significant and consistent enough in the negative reviews to warrant careful scrutiny by prospective families and by oversight bodies.
Overall impression and patterns: The overall sentiment is mixed-to-contradictory — many families would highly recommend Delaney Park for rehabilitation due to strong therapy and several exemplary staff members, while a sizable portion of reviewers would not recommend it at all due to communication failures, nursing-level neglect, and operational dysfunction. The data suggest variability by shift, unit, or individual staff: when experienced, engaged nurses and therapists are present, outcomes and family satisfaction are high; when staffing is thin, turnover is high, or communication breaks down, patients are at risk for poor clinical outcomes and families are distressed.
Takeaways for families: If considering Delaney Park, families should verify the specific unit and staffing patterns, ask for named points of contact, confirm medication and discharge coordination protocols in writing, and monitor clinical needs (wounds, feeding tubes, oxygen) closely. Visiting during different shifts, inquiring about nurse-to-patient ratios, and documenting conversations can help mitigate risks given the documented variability. The facility demonstrates clear strengths in therapy, appearance, and some individual staff/leadership, but the frequency and severity of the negative reports about nursing care, communication, and safety are substantial and should be investigated and weighed when making decisions.
