These reviews present a highly polarized and inconsistent portrait of Titusville Rehab & Nursing. Across the dataset there are recurring and strongly contrasting themes: many reviewers praise the rehabilitation teams, certain named staff members, and parts of the facility (especially newly remodeled wings and private rooms), while an equally large group of reviewers describe severe neglect, safety hazards, and poor clinical and custodial care. The overall sentiment cannot be characterized as uniformly positive or negative; rather, it is fractured by wide variability in care quality depending on unit, shift, or period of stay.
Care quality and clinical concerns: The most notable positive thread is consistent praise for the rehabilitation program (physical, occupational, speech therapy). Multiple reviewers credited therapy teams with substantial functional recovery — patients walking after therapy, fast progress, and strong therapy engagement. Conversely, clinical complaints focus on nursing care lapses: delayed or missed medications, failure to respond to call bells, inadequate wound care, delayed physician evaluation, and reports of untreated infections. Several reviews allege severe clinical harms including stage 4 pressure ulcers, infections requiring hospitalization, falls with delayed transfers, and even death. These serious incidents are reported often enough to represent a major pattern of risk for some residents. Agency and temporary staff are frequently cited as contributors to inconsistent clinical performance.
Staff behavior and communication: Reports of staff vary from “caring and compassionate” to “rude, unprofessional or abusive.” Many reviews single out individual staff (nurses, CNAs, admissions personnel, therapists) for exceptional care, naming them and praising responsiveness and kindness. At the same time, a substantial body of reviews describe rude language, lack of empathy, and instances of abuse or neglect. Communication problems are common: families reported difficulty reaching the facility by phone, long hold times, unanswered messages, and poor responsiveness to complaints. Management responsiveness also varies: some reviews praise the director of nursing or admissions team and report constructive engagement, while others accuse management of ignoring complaints or covering up incidents.
Facilities, cleanliness and safety: Several reviewers applaud the new wing, private rooms, clean areas, courtyard and pleasant common spaces, with the “new unit” and renovations repeatedly mentioned as improvements. In contrast, many reviews describe serious environmental and maintenance problems: pervasive smells of urine or feces, dirty floors and restrooms, pest sightings (roaches, gnats), mold (including black mold) around windows and air conditioning, and broken or unsafe fixtures (loose air conditioners, dangling emergency cords, broken tiles). Those safety and hygiene complaints are often linked to clinical concerns and dignity issues for residents.
Dining and daily living: Opinions on food are mixed. Some reviews compliment the kitchen staff, dietician involvement, and good meals that supported recovery. Others describe bland or disgusting food, insufficient meal portions, delayed meals, and feeding assistance not provided when needed. Several reviewers reported inadequate assistance during meals and staff too busy to help residents. Personal items lost or stolen, laundry problems, and inadequate showering frequency are recurrent themes under daily living and dignity of residents.
Activities and atmosphere: Activities (bingo, arts & crafts, church services) receive positive mention in many reviews and are credited with improving morale. However, COVID-related restrictions or management decisions sometimes limited group activities, and a few reviewers said the activities coordinator shut programs down. The social atmosphere is likewise mixed: some describe a warm, family-like environment, while others describe loud disruptive behavior, staff cursing, and a sad atmosphere in certain units.
Management and trends: Multiple reviews note management changes, renovations, and a new private rehab wing; some families reported that changes led to visible improvements and praised the admissions process and the director of nursing. Yet the timeline appears inconsistent — improvements in some wings or after management turnover co-exist with persistent problems elsewhere. This suggests that the facility may be in transition: parts of the building and staff may be improving while legacy issues (staffing levels, culture, maintenance backlog) remain unresolved in other areas.
Overall assessment and patterns: The most important pattern is variability. There are genuine strengths: a strong therapy program, many individual staff who care deeply, and recent facility upgrades that some residents and families appreciate. However, serious and recurring negative reports (neglect, bed sores, infection, theft, hygiene and pest problems, unsafe maintenance issues, and poor communication) are frequent and severe enough to warrant caution. Families considering this facility should be aware that experiences appear to differ greatly depending on unit, staffing on particular shifts, and current management initiatives. If possible, prospective residents and families should (1) tour the specific unit where the resident will be placed, (2) ask about current staffing levels and turnover, (3) inquire about infection control and maintenance remediation actions, (4) seek references for recent stays in that unit, and (5) confirm communication protocols for updates and incident reporting. The reviews indicate real excellence in rehabilitation and individual caregiving in many cases, but also documented serious lapses in others — decisions about placement should weigh both the documented successes and the recurring safety and care failures reported by families.
