Overall sentiment in these reviews is mixed but leans negative for long-term custodial care while consistently positive for short-term rehabilitation and therapy services. Many reviewers praise individual staff members — especially aides, CNAs, therapists, and laundry personnel — describing them as kind, hardworking, and professional. Several people reported good outcomes from outpatient or short-term inpatient rehab: therapists improved range of motion, schedules were convenient and flexible, and some reviewers explicitly stated they would return for rehab. Volunteer and activity leaders also describe engaging programs and a welcoming environment for events.
However, multiple serious concerns appear repeatedly and indicate systemic problems. A primary pattern is inconsistency: experiences vary widely by shift, wing, or reviewer. Some families report clean rooms, attentive staff, and good meals, while others report neglect, poor hygiene, and medical oversights. Staffing shortages and an apparently low nurse-to-patient ratio are cited as root causes for delayed assistance, long chair times, infrequent doctor visits, and insufficient nightly or personal care. This inconsistency is compounded by administrative instability — reviewers noted an excessive turnover of administrators (one cited the facility was on its third administrator in a year) and broken promises from management, with care-plan meetings not scheduled in advance and poor communication with families.
Safety and clinical concerns are significant in several reviews. Specific incidents include a resident hospitalized with a UTI, an open pressure sore on a tailbone left unexamined by a doctor for seven days, and reports of incontinence mishandling (soiled diapers left in drawers, clothes smelling of feces). There are also accounts of residents left unattended for long periods (one stated 2.5+ hours in a coffee room) and basic hygiene lapses (hair not combed, teeth not brushed). These reports suggest lapses in supervision and clinical follow-up that could lead to avoidable complications (e.g., infections, skin breakdown). Delayed or absent physician visits and an account of a physician assistant perceived as unhelpful amplify medical concerns.
Facility maintenance and environment are another mixed area. The exterior and entryway receive positive mentions for being pleasant and welcoming, and some reviewers call the interior clean with pleasant smells. At the same time, multiple reviews describe aging infrastructure: old and stained floors, worn equipment, plumbing problems, a leaky roof, and malfunctioning air conditioning. Laundry service is praised for speed and helpfulness, but reviewers also note that laundry facilities can be under-capacity, indicating operational strain. Dining comments are polarized: some reviewers say food variety is good and snacks are available, while others report meals that are lukewarm, difficult to identify, and not suited to residents' dietary needs. A few reviews note recent dining improvements and a new menu/dining-room options, suggesting some efforts at remediation.
Activities and social engagement receive positive feedback from volunteers and some families who praise bingo, crafts, parties, and faith-based programs that create a family-like atmosphere. Yet a number of reviews say there are not enough activities or that staff discourage mobility, preferring wheelchair use over encouraging independent walking. This again points to inconsistent practice depending on staff and unit.
In summary, the facility shows strength in rehabilitation and therapy services, compassionate individual caregivers, and a welcoming front-end presentation. However, recurring negative themes — inconsistent caregiving, staffing and nursing shortages, administrative turnover and poor communication, serious hygiene and medical lapses, and aging building systems — raise red flags for long-term residential care. Families considering this center should weigh the positive rehab reputation and compassionate staff against documented episodes of neglect and facility shortcomings. Prospective residents or their families should specifically ask about current leadership stability, staffing ratios for the intended unit, policies for clinical follow-up (physician/PA visits), incontinence and skin care protocols, and recent maintenance or dining improvements. If choosing the facility, frequent monitoring, regular care-plan meetings, and direct communication with therapy and nursing leadership are advisable to help mitigate the inconsistencies reflected in these reviews.
