The reviews for New Horizons Lanier Park are mixed and polarized, with clear and repeated praise in some areas alongside serious concerns in others. Positive comments emphasize a clean and safe physical environment, pleasant and personable administrative staff, and many instances of friendly, respectful nursing care. Several reviewers specifically highlight the quality of the dining (described as delicious) and the facility's willingness to accommodate dietary preferences. Rehabilitation services are singled out as a strong point — excellent physical and occupational therapy is repeatedly noted, and one reviewer specifically said it is "not your typical rehab/nursing home," implying a higher-than-expected level of therapy or a more home-like atmosphere. Multiple reviewers also describe staff as attentive to daily needs and warm/caring, and some explicitly call the facility wonderful.
However, a distinct and concerning set of negative themes runs through other reviews. The most serious clinical safety issue mentioned is mold found on a feeding tube that reviewers said was not addressed promptly; a follow-up note that the tube was replaced after transfer to a new facility underscores how significant that incident felt to the family. Several reviewers described a broader lack of concern among most staff, saying staff were unresponsive or displayed indifference to problems. Related to that, poor communication is a repeated complaint: families reported difficulty getting basic information (for example, trouble obtaining a room number), unanswered calls, and a general sense of unresponsiveness from the facility.
Staffing and consistency of care appear to be another major pattern. Some reviews say staff are warm, caring, and attentive, while others report a decline in staffing and inattentive care unless a family member is physically watching. This suggests variability in day-to-day staffing levels or staff performance, leading to very different experiences for different residents or families. One reviewer noted that the social worker showed some concern even when most staff did not, which highlights that individual employees may provide good advocacy even when systemic issues persist.
Management and organizational concerns emerge from comments describing the facility as poorly run, with disappointed families wanting to move loved ones to other facilities. Multiple reviewers expressed that their overall experience was negative and that they would not recommend the facility. There are also comments indicating uncertainty about the quality or fit of the facility (some reviewers saying they were unclear about the place or felt they had mistakenly selected it), which points to problems with orientation, intake communication, or expectation-setting during placement.
Taken together, the reviews portray a facility with real strengths in environment, food, and rehabilitative therapies, and with some staff who provide respectful, attentive care. At the same time, significant and recurring issues — notably inconsistent staff responsiveness, communication failures, reported staffing declines, and at least one serious infection-control/medical oversight concern (mold on a feeding tube) — have led to strongly negative experiences for other families. The pattern is one of variability: some residents and families have positive experiences and praise specific departments and staff, while others experience lapses in basic communication, attention, and clinical follow-through that lead them to seek transfers.
If assessing the facility for placement, these reviews suggest weighing the noted strengths (clean/safe environment, therapy quality, food, and some caring staff) against the reported risks of inconsistent staffing, poor communication, and lapses in clinical attention. For families considering New Horizons Lanier Park, it would be prudent to ask specific, targeted questions about infection control practices (particularly around feeding tubes and lines), staff-to-resident ratios and recent staffing changes, how after-hours communication is handled, and how the facility ensures consistent standards of care across shifts. The presence of both strongly positive and strongly negative reports points to a need for closer, case-by-case evaluation and for the facility to address the recurring operational and communication issues raised by multiple reviewers.
