Overall sentiment across these review summaries is mixed but leans strongly positive around the clinical therapy and hands-on caregiving teams, while showing worrying and starkly negative concerns about safety, leadership, and customer service from a subset of reviewers.
Care quality and therapy: The most consistent praise centers on Harborview Jesup's therapy department and clinical staff. Multiple reviewers call the therapy program "highly effective," "top tier," and credit physical and occupational therapy teams with helping residents regain strength, independence, and return home. Named clinicians (Brande, Wendy, Heidi, Morgan, Morgan Jones) and the activities staff (including Maddie) are repeatedly highlighted for compassionate, skilled, and motivating care. Reviewers describe therapists as caring, emotionally supportive, and family-oriented; the presence of a therapy dog, Asher, is mentioned as an emotional support added-value. Several accounts specifically note improved quality of life, expedited help, and positive outcomes after rehabilitation stays.
Nursing and direct care: Nursing and CNA staff are frequently described as excellent, attentive, and respectful. Many reviewers report quick responses, dignified treatment of residents, and an overall "home away from home" atmosphere. Positive mentions extend to office and administrative staff who in some reviews are called "amazing," and one reviewer singled out Medicaid assistance provided by Andrea Payne as helpful. Food and daily living supports are reported as acceptable or good by several commenters. This cluster of feedback portrays a facility with strong bedside care and a supportive daily environment for many residents.
Activities and environment: Harborview Jesup receives favorable comments for engagement and programming. Reviewers note holiday-oriented activities, a dedicated activities director, creative and fun staff who encourage resident participation, and a sense that programming helps residents remain social and motivated. The tone from many reviews suggests a warm, family-like culture among direct-care and activities staff.
Management, communication, and safety concerns: Contrasting sharply with the positives are serious negative allegations from other reviewers. Several summaries allege dangerous staff behavior — including a purported attempt to unplug a ventilator — and call attention to unsafe conditions and purported harm to staff and residents. Those reports assert lack of transparency, mention regulatory involvement, and include calls for staff termination or even facility shutdown. In addition, other reviewers describe unprofessional administration, disrespectful internal communication, and poor leadership. Separately, multiple comments cite long phone hold times, unresponsiveness, rude employees, and difficulty communicating with staff or administration, indicating customer service and access issues.
Patterns and considerations: The reviews present a clear pattern of strong clinical and therapeutic performance combined with inconsistent administrative performance and some very serious but isolated-sounding safety allegations. The number of positive, detailed testimonials about therapy outcomes, specific staff members, and activities suggests reliable clinical strengths. However, the presence of severe accusations around safety and regulatory involvement — even if from a minority of summaries — is notable and materially important for prospective residents and families. The juxtaposition of glowing staff-level praise with critiques of leadership and customer service suggests variability by department and potential issues with oversight or communication.
Concluding assessment: If evaluating Harborview Jesup, weigh the facility's well-documented therapy and hands-on caregiving strengths and the repeated personal recommendations from families and patients against the troubling allegations regarding safety and administration raised in some reviews. The most common positives are effective rehabilitation, compassionate therapists and nurses, engaging activities, and a family-like culture. The most serious negatives are safety-related accusations, claims of poor transparency and leadership, and customer-service shortfalls (long hold times, unresponsiveness, rude interactions). Given these mixed signals, it would be prudent for decision-makers to verify the status of any regulatory investigations, ask for recent quality and safety records, and speak with current residents/families about both clinical outcomes and administrative responsiveness before making placement or referral decisions.
