Overall sentiment: Reviews for Marietta Center for Nursing and Healing are highly polarized, with a substantial body of detailed complaints about safety, hygiene, staffing, communication, and management counterbalanced by a large number of strong endorsements — particularly for the facility’s rehabilitation services and many individual caregivers. The most consistent positive pattern is praise for the therapy teams (PT/OT/ST) and many named nurses, CNAs, and social work/admissions staff who are described as compassionate, skilled, and responsive. The most consistent and serious negatives involve systemic operational failures: chronic understaffing, long call-light delays, medication and treatment errors, missing personal items, and multiple safety/infection-control incidents.
Care quality and clinical safety: A frequent theme is uneven clinical care. Some patients experienced meaningful rehabilitation gains and attentive nursing care; others report missed medications (including IV antibiotics), delayed or absent physician/NP visits, poor wound/incision monitoring, and situations that resulted in hospital readmissions for sepsis or other complications. Serious safety incidents are repeatedly described: falls, wheelchair failures, catheter bleeding, and near-miss events. Several reviews assert that failures in basic clinical processes (timely meds, monitoring blood sugar before PT, responding to alarms) directly produced harm. These accounts together point to inconsistent clinical oversight and variable competency across shifts and teams.
Staffing, responsiveness, and communication: A dominant negative thread is understaffing and slow responsiveness. Night and weekend staffing shortages are repeatedly cited; call-button response times of 30 minutes to multiple hours are described in many reports. Families frequently complain about no callbacks, difficulty reaching managers, and being kept uninformed about care decisions, transfers, or incidents. Conversely, many reviews single out particular staff members (names like Kayla, Leo, Felicia, Erica, Agnes and others) and departments (therapy; some admissions/social work personnel) for exemplary attention. This contrast suggests pockets of committed staff working under systemic constraints and variable leadership engagement.
Therapy and rehabilitation: Therapy is the facility’s most consistently praised area. Multiple reviews describe excellent, collaborative PT/OT/ST teams that helped patients regain mobility and return home. Several success stories include regaining walking ability and meaningful functional recovery. Therapy staff are frequently called out by name and credited for positive outcomes, which is why many reviewers recommend the facility specifically for short-term rehab rather than long-term nursing placement.
Hygiene, cleanliness, and maintenance: Reviews on cleanliness and facility condition are sharply divided. Numerous reviewers describe clean, odor-free rooms, orderly grounds, and freshly painted/spotless areas; others assert the opposite — reports of roaches, ants, mold, dirty grout, soiled bedding left for hours, broken window blinds, and gaping HVAC holes. Several reviews raise alarm about major infrastructure failures (generator not working during outages, sewer problems) and slow or absent repair response despite donor/resident payments. These maintenance and pest-control inconsistencies are important because they affect infection risk, patient comfort, and overall perception of safety.
Personal property, laundry, and meals: Repeated complaints describe lost or stolen belongings (clothing, TVs, nightstands), torn name tags in garments, and delayed or missing laundry returns. Theft claims are prominent and emotionally charged. Mealtime issues include poor food quality for some, cold or late meals for others, and critical timing problems (insulin administered with long delays in meal delivery resulting in hypoglycemia). Some reviews praise food and dietary staff, but problems with meal timing and quantity are common enough to be a recurring complaint.
Management, leadership, and culture: Many reviewers criticize management: unresponsiveness, lack of accountability, gatekeeping of grievances, and in some reports hostile or bullying leadership (including a cited Director of Nursing). High turnover and low staff morale are repeatedly mentioned. At the same time, some accounts describe proactive administrators who resolved issues and improved staffing/scheduling; these suggest variability in leadership performance across time, wings, or shifts. The coexistence of strong individual performers and organizational governance problems points to systemic leadership or resourcing challenges rather than uniformly poor or excellent management.
Dementia and long-term care suitability: Several reviewers explicitly warn against placing people with dementia at this facility, noting poor handling of cognitive impairment, agitation after admission, refusal of services for dementia patients, and safety concerns when staff lacked training or time to supervise. For long-term, memory-care-dependent residents, many reviews recommend caution.
Discharge planning and transitions: Poor discharge communication and planning appear in multiple reviews — families report abrupt or early discharges, packed belongings mishandled, lack of rehab continuity, and transfers back to the hospital. Positive reviews of discharge tend to come from cases where admissions/social services were proactive and communicative.
Notable patterns and recommendations: The reviews suggest a split recommendation: the facility can deliver very good short-term rehabilitation outcomes and has many compassionate, skilled individuals on staff; however, chronic staffing shortages, inconsistent nursing care, medication/treatment errors, infection-control and maintenance problems, theft/laundry issues, and management gaps create substantial safety and reliability concerns for long-term placements or medically complex patients. Prospective families should (1) prioritize short-term rehab stays if the therapy team is the primary need; (2) verify staffing levels for the intended unit/shift (especially nights/weekends); (3) confirm protocols for medication timing, infection control, and dementia care; (4) inventory and secure valuables, and (5) meet with therapy, nursing leadership, and social work prior to transfer to clarify escalation paths, meal timing, toileting/continence routines, and discharge planning.
In summary, Marietta Center for Nursing and Healing shows meaningful strengths in rehabilitation and pockets of outstanding, compassionate staff, but consistent and serious operational shortcomings reported by many families — including safety incidents, poor responsiveness, cleanliness and maintenance failures, medication and care delays, and alleged theft — raise significant concerns about its reliability for medically complex or long-term residents. Experiences appear highly variable by wing, shift, and staff on duty; therefore careful vetting, clear communication of needs, and active oversight from family members are strongly advised if choosing this facility.
