Overall sentiment: Reviews for Stone Ledge Manor Senior Living are strongly mixed, with a large number of families and residents praising the staff, amenities, and home-like environment, while a significant minority report serious concerns about staffing, cleanliness, dining, item loss, and safety practices. Many reviews describe the staff as compassionate, family-oriented, and attentive; others describe understaffing, turnover, and management communication failures that have directly affected care quality. The facility appears to deliver an excellent experience for many residents, especially with regard to social programming and staff who go above and beyond, but repeat, specific negative patterns demand careful attention from prospective families.
Care quality and staffing: A dominant positive theme is the presence of caring, compassionate staff who treat residents like family, provide attentive care, facilitate smooth transitions to memory care or hospice, and maintain strong relationships with families (including weekly calls and personally involved executive leadership in many reports). Several reviews single out leaders by name (e.g., Jessica McCleod and Sherry) and praise an executive director who is hands-on and knowledgeable. Conversely, a persistent negative theme is understaffing—particularly on the 3–11 shift and weekends—combined with frequent staffing changes and turnover. These staffing problems are linked to concrete harms in some reviews: delayed showers, missed meals or cold meals, lost walkers or glasses for many days, delayed medication follow-up or not following doctor’s orders, and at least one altercation or injury with inconsistent documentation and claims that cameras were not functioning. Emergency call buttons being unreliable was also noted, which compounds safety concerns when staffing is thin.
Facilities and cleanliness: Many reviewers praise the physical plant: spacious private rooms with private baths and individual climate control, cozy communal areas with a fireplace, a courtyard and outdoor areas, ample parking, and resort-like, well-kept grounds. On-site amenities are often highlighted—coffee bar, library, salon, formal dining room, and bus transportation for shopping trips. Memory care is available and described as secure and monitored by some families. At the same time, multiple reviews raise cleanliness and maintenance issues: reports of ants/ant infestations in rooms, urine and fecal odors in parts of the building, dirty laundry, matted hair and hygiene lapses for specific residents, and older areas needing updates. These cleanliness concerns are not universal but are serious where they occur and are often tied to the same staffing problems cited elsewhere.
Dining and nutrition: Dining experiences are split. Several reviewers praise the cook and say meals are excellent, well-balanced, and led to weight gain for some residents. Others report cold meals, delayed service, poor/unhealthy food, no menu options, and insufficient dining space. The inconsistency in meal quality and delivery appears linked to staffing and scheduling challenges in the kitchen and dining areas. For families for whom food and timely service are critical, these mixed reports are an important consideration.
Activities and social life: Activity programming receives largely positive feedback. Reviewers consistently note a robust schedule—bingo, cards, arts and crafts, walking clubs, music, church services—and an engaged activities director. Many residents thrive socially and enjoy shared meals, conversation areas, and the overall social atmosphere. A few reviews indicate a lack of enough activities in certain units or a single small memory-care common area, suggesting that while programming exists, capacity or space constraints can limit accessibility.
Safety, incidents, and documentation: Several worrying themes recur: lost mobility aids (e.g., walker missing for six days), loss of clothing or glasses, residents being pulled up by arms, and at least one reported altercation causing bruises and scraped knees with conflicting incident reports. Reviewers also reported that cameras were described as not working and that management sometimes failed to consult a physician following injuries. Emergency call buttons reported as nonfunctional in some cases increase the severity of these concerns. Where leadership and staff were praised, families credited them with keeping residents safe during crises such as Hurricane Irma and the COVID-19 pandemic; but when staffing, documentation, or communication faltered, families reported feeling the facility was not trustworthy.
Management and communication: Experiences with management are polarized. Many reviewers commend the executive director and site leadership for excellent communication, transparency, and personal involvement—helping coordinate hospital discharges, hospice transitions, and regular family updates. Other reviewers describe an unprofessional front desk or business office, delayed invoice processing, dismissive responses to concerns, or difficulty reaching corporate and weekend staff. These inconsistent management experiences appear to create very different outcomes for families depending on which staff and leaders are in place at the time.
Value and recommendations: Cost perceptions vary: some families feel Stone Ledge offers a fair or strong value given the amenities and level of personalized care; others feel it is pricey and not worth the cost given issues with food quality, staffing, or cleanliness. Many reviewers highly recommend the community—especially for memory care or assisted living where staff continuity and engaged programming are present—while a notable minority advise caution or call it a last-resort option, recommending frequent family involvement and careful, specific questions before placement.
Notable patterns and actionable concerns for prospective families: Recurrent, concrete issues include understaffing (especially nights and weekends), inconsistent meal delivery and quality, lost or delayed retrieval of personal mobility aids and belongings, hygiene/cleanliness lapses in some units, malfunctioning emergency call systems, occasional unprofessional front-desk/office behavior, and incidents with questionable documentation and non-functioning cameras. Conversely, positive, recurring strengths include devoted caregiving staff, strong activity programming, private and spacious rooms with good amenities, on-site medical services, and executive staff who sometimes go the extra mile.
Bottom line: Stone Ledge Manor offers many features families value—private rooms, on-site medical and salon services, active programming, and staff who frequently create a family-like atmosphere. However, multiple reviews document systemic operational weaknesses (staffing shortages, inconsistent management responsiveness, dining and hygiene problems, and safety/documentation lapses) that can materially affect resident well-being. Prospective residents and families should weigh both sides: visit multiple times (including evenings/weekends), ask specifically about staffing patterns and emergency systems, verify the status of monitoring/camera systems, inquire about meal service protocols and warming options in secured units, clarify incident reporting and physician-notification procedures, and check references from current families to determine whether the strengths or the operational weaknesses are dominant at the time of placement.
