Overall sentiment in the reviews for Arthur Home is mixed, with a clear split between strong praise for direct care staff and serious concerns about management, administrative processes, safety, and consistency. Many reviewers emphasize that frontline caregivers—nurses and aides—are compassionate, competent, and attentive. Specific positives called out repeatedly include good staff communication, helpful nurses, an on-site doctor, and arranged transport to medical appointments. A number of reviewers reported that residents were happy and that their power of attorney (POA) felt supported and able to advocate effectively. Activities such as bingo and daytime television are available, and food is described as "fine" by some; a few reviewers felt overnight stays were expensive but worth the cost.
At the same time, there are frequent and significant complaints about administrative and managerial issues. Several summaries describe poor communication from management, unreturned calls, delayed decisions, and even an admission denial attributed to a charting error. These process failures have tangible consequences for families: one reviewer described needing long-distance transport, others reported Medicaid plan difficulties that shifted costs to self-pay, and multiple families experienced stress related to billing and admissions. Management and the director are explicitly criticized in some reviews, and reviewers recommend that other facilities may be better choices.
Safety and infection-control concerns appear in multiple summaries. At least one reviewer alleged that COVID guidelines were not followed; others reported problems that indicate lapses in hygiene, with allegations of infection and injury. These reports contrast with the otherwise positive descriptions of clinical staff and raise questions about consistency of practice, oversight, and the facility’s infection-prevention protocols. Given that both compassionate caregivers and serious hygiene/safety issues are reported, a plausible interpretation is uneven implementation of policies and variability by unit or shift.
Staff quality is described as mixed overall. Several reviewers explicitly called staff "excellent," "kind," or part of a "great team," while others reported uncaring staff behavior and even called the facility "awful." This inconsistency suggests uneven hiring, training, or turnover—factors that commonly produce varied family experiences in senior living settings. Positive anecdotes emphasize strong advocacy and personal attention; negative anecdotes emphasize neglect, poor hygiene, or incidents leading to injury or infection.
Cost and payment issues are another recurrent theme. Reviewers mention expensive overnight stays, and at least one account describes Medicaid plan complications that forced a switch to self-pay, increasing family burden and stress. Prospective residents and families should therefore expect to ask detailed questions about billing practices, what is covered by Medicaid or other payers, and how administrative errors are handled.
In summary, Arthur Home appears to deliver genuinely good hands-on care in many cases, supported by an on-site doctor and staff who some families find compassionate and communicative. However, the facility also shows notable weaknesses in management, administrative accuracy, communication responsiveness, and possibly in infection-control and safety practices. These issues have led to serious negative experiences for some families, including admission denials, financial strain, and reports of injury or infection. Prospective residents and their families should weigh these contrasting reports carefully: when considering Arthur Home, request specific, documentable information about admission processes and paperwork accuracy, ask about infection-control policies and recent inspection outcomes, inquire about staff turnover and training, verify how transportation and on-site medical services are provided, and confirm billing/insurance practices in writing. A thorough in-person visit, conversations with multiple staff members (including management), and references from recent families will help determine whether the facility’s strengths (caregiver compassion, medical access, activities) outweigh the management and safety concerns described by other reviewers.
