The available reviews show a deeply mixed and concerning picture of Golden LivingCenter - Rome. On one hand, at least one reviewer praises the site as a rehab-focused facility, calling it the "best in the country" and giving a 5/5 overall rating. On the other hand, multiple very serious negative claims appear in other summaries, including allegations of severe neglect leading to pressure ulcers (bedsores), oozing and bleeding wounds, urinary tract infections, sepsis, and even death. These are not minor complaints; they point to potentially critical failures in clinical care and infection control for certain residents.
Care quality is the most divergent and most consequential theme. Positive commentary centers on rehabilitation services and an excellent overall rating from a single reviewer, suggesting that the facility may deliver strong therapy programs or positive outcomes for some residents. Contrasting sharply with that are explicit allegations of poor care: advanced pressure ulcers, active wound exudate, urinary tract infections, progression to sepsis, and resulting mortality. Those reports indicate possible lapses in basic nursing care, wound management, monitoring for infection, or timely escalation to higher-level medical care for some patients. Because of the gravity of these allegations, they represent significant safety and quality-of-care concerns that warrant verification through objective sources (inspection reports, state surveys, medical records, or conversations with current families).
Staff and management concerns are another prominent theme. One review explicitly calls the staff "terrible," and another mentions a breach of trust between the facility and a family or resident. Such language suggests problems with staff behavior, competence, responsiveness, or communication, and it raises questions about leadership, supervision, and accountability. A breached trust allegation implies dissatisfaction with how complaints or clinical issues were handled. While a single glowing review suggests some families have a very positive experience with staff and management, the presence of strong negative language points to inconsistent performance and possible failures in customer relations and complaint resolution.
Facility condition also appears in the summaries: one reviewer describes a "shabby building," indicating concerns about the physical environment, upkeep, or aging infrastructure. Facility condition can affect resident safety, infection control, and overall quality of life. The reviews do not provide details on dining or activities — neither positive nor negative comments about meals, menus, social programming, or rehabilitation modalities beyond the broad "rehab-focused" characterization are present. That lack of information means those areas remain unknown based on the current summaries and should be directly evaluated during any follow-up (site visit, menus, activity schedules).
Taken together, the reviews reveal a pattern of stark inconsistency: a strong endorsement of rehabilitation services and an overall 5/5 rating contrasted with reports of serious clinical neglect and poor staffing/facility conditions. This mixed pattern suggests that experiences at Golden LivingCenter - Rome may vary dramatically between different residents, units, or time periods. Given the severity of some allegations (wounds, infection, sepsis, death), it is prudent to treat the negative reports as red flags that require further investigation rather than dismissing them as isolated grievances. Recommended next steps for anyone evaluating this facility would be to review recent state inspection and deficiency reports, ask the facility for wound care and infection-control protocols, request staffing ratios and staff training documentation, seek out additional family references, and tour the facility to assess current cleanliness and maintenance. Only with that additional, objective information can a more definitive assessment of the facility’s overall safety and quality be made.
