Overall sentiment toward Brickmont at Acworth is mixed and polarized: many reviewers praise the community, staff, and memory care, while a substantial number report operational failures, inconsistent care, and management/communication issues. Frequently cited strengths include a beautiful, clean, and brand-new facility with pleasant outdoor spaces and attractive apartment layouts. Many families specifically highlight compassionate, attentive caregivers and a memory care team they trust and admire. Multiple reviews name leadership and staff positively (Executive Director Susan, Wellness Director Charity, Memory Care Director Cari Anne, Community Relations Director Robert, and activity staff such as Allysa/Kerri/Kerry Ann), citing warmth, professionalism, individualized dementia expertise, and therapeutic programming that provides peace of mind for families.
Care quality is a major bifurcated theme. On one side, numerous reviews describe highly attentive nursing and caregiving, excellent medication management in some units, and memory care that supports dignity and engagement with daily activities, music, art, and safe outdoor strolls. Families report smooth transitions, proactive updates, and staff who go the extra mile. On the other side, a significant set of reviews documents troubling care lapses: residents left in soiled garments or diapers for hours, delayed or missed medications, call buttons unanswered, and reports that some staff “ignore” residents. These serious safety and dignity concerns coexist with praise for individual caregivers, suggesting inconsistent staffing practices and variable staff training or supervision.
Operational and administrative problems are frequently cited and form a central pattern across negative reviews. Many families report erratic billing, a lack of a functional billing department, unexplained charges (including charging for food during quarantine), and trouble obtaining refunds or prorated reimbursements. Communication from management is often described as poor or non-existent — phone messages unreturned, leadership changes not communicated, and promises made at move-in not upheld. Several reviewers note leadership and coordinator turnover (Wellness Director and Activities Director departures) and characterize the management approach as owner- or revenue-driven, which contributes to distrust among families.
Housekeeping, maintenance, and laundry emerge as consistent trouble spots in the negative reviews. Complaints include rooms not being cleaned on schedule, dirty carpets and hallway floors, hair in bathrooms, missing sheets and washcloths, and intermittent laundry service with missing or lost clothing. Maintenance items such as burned-out light bulbs and smoke detector batteries reportedly go unaddressed. These practical failures, combined with billing and communication issues, amplify family frustration and distress.
Dining and activities are described very inconsistently. Several reviewers praise the dining staff, variety, large portions, café amenities, and pleasant meal experiences; others report poor food quality (powdered eggs, Styrofoam containers, watered-down drinks), long rigid meal service, meals cooling before serving, and restricted family access to dining during certain protocols. Activities in assisted living and memory care receive mixed feedback: some residents thrive with multiple daily offerings and well-run outings, while other families report minimal activities, especially for wheelchair-bound residents, or an activity director who is not inclusive. Memory care programming is more consistently praised for being therapeutic and engaging.
Safety and staffing level concerns are also salient. Reports of insufficient night staffing and inadequate bathroom assistance at night, combined with call-response delays, raise safety flags for higher-dependency residents. At the same time, other reviewers report timely emergency help and excellent nurse tech responses after hospital visits. The inconsistency suggests staffing coverage and responsiveness vary by shift and over time, potentially correlating with turnover and staffing shortages.
In sum, Brickmont at Acworth appears to offer a high-quality physical environment and has many dedicated, skilled staff — especially within memory care — that provide excellent, compassionate support for some residents. However, the facility shows repeated patterns of inconsistent operational execution: housekeeping/laundry failures, maintenance neglect, dining service problems, poor management communication, billing errors, and concerning reports about resident neglect and staffing shortages. These issues are often linked in reviews to leadership turnover and perceived prioritization of finances. Prospective residents and families should weigh the strong positives in memory and social programming against the operational and safety concerns, and when touring or considering placement they should: ask for written guarantees on housekeeping/laundry and dining services; clarify billing practices and any planned rate increases; request recent staffing ratios, turnover data, and notification policies for leadership changes; inspect room cleanliness and common areas; and, where possible, seek references from current families in the specific unit of interest. Doing so will help assess whether the current operational realities match the community’s many praised strengths or reflect the concerning inconsistencies documented by multiple reviewers.
