Overall sentiment is highly mixed, with a clear pattern of polarized experiences. A substantial number of reviews praise the frontline caregiving team and specific employees for being compassionate, attentive, and very helpful. Multiple mentions describe CNAs and caregivers as responsive, individualized in their approach, and instrumental in helping residents adjust. Therapy and rehabilitation staff receive positive remarks, and several reviewers note that the facility is clean, recently updated, and comfortable with no unpleasant odors. Transportation support, activities programming, and an accommodating move-in process are also commonly noted strengths.
However, these positives sit alongside numerous serious concerns. Several reviews report chronic understaffing and high turnover, including instances where only two caregivers were on duty, which reviewers link to diminished quality of care and even signs of neglect. There are explicit reports of rapid decline in conditions, inadequate short stays (one cited a 23-hour unsatisfactory stay), and insufficient meal provision (one report stated two meals were served in one night). Food quality is singled out negatively in multiple remarks. The variability in care appears high: while some families describe attentive, individualized care, others experienced poor or neglectful treatment.
Management and administrative issues are a recurring and significant theme. Some reviewers praise an available and helpful administrator and good leadership, but an equal number report troubling behavior from management — including an administrator reportedly absent for months, allegations of dishonesty, profit-centered decision-making, retaliatory measures toward families, and restricted family access. Financial and administrative red flags appear repeatedly: questionable billing practices, hidden fees, and a cited cost of roughly $1,500 for a full seven days in one case. Separate complaints allege non-payment to vendors, collections actions, and legal involvement. These issues raise concerns about transparency and fiscal stability.
The facility's suitability for residents with memory care needs is inconsistent. A review explicitly stated the community is not trained for memory care and that a potential resident was rejected due to aggressive behavior. This suggests families seeking specialized dementia or behavior management services should verify staff training and program availability directly. Likewise, while many direct-care staff are praised by name (Bobby, Norvella, Daysha, Faith, Paddy, Jordan), frequent turnover means that positive personnel experiences may not be stable over time.
Facilities and environment receive uniformly positive notes: clean, remodeled, updated spaces; comfortable accommodations; and good infection-control/odor management. Activities programming and rehabilitative therapies are mentioned as beneficial. Transportation is appreciated, though one reviewer noted that bumpy roads made travel uncomfortable for someone with back pain — a minor logistical note but useful for families considering travel routes.
In summary, Imboden Creek Senior Living Center and Rehabilitation appears to offer strong, compassionate direct care in many cases, with clean facilities and effective therapy programs. At the same time, there are repeated, substantive concerns about staffing levels, inconsistent care quality, management transparency and behavior, billing practices, and financial/legal issues with vendors. The reviews suggest a facility that can provide excellent hands-on care under certain staff and management conditions, but whose performance and reliability may vary considerably. Prospective residents and families should conduct up-to-date, in-person assessments; ask specifically about current staffing ratios, turnover, memory-care capabilities, billing and contract terms, vendor payment practices, visitor policies, and who is currently in leadership to ensure that the positive aspects noted in many reviews are present and the documented concerns have been addressed.
