Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly polarized but leans heavily negative when weighted toward frequency and severity of complaints. Multiple reviewers describe systemic problems: chronic understaffing (with particular gaps at night and on weekends), slow or non-existent responses to call buttons, and inconsistent quality of caregiving. These staffing problems are repeatedly tied to neglectful outcomes including residents being left in urine or feces, lack of regular bathing, soiled or unchanged bedding, missed or delayed medications, and insufficient feeding support for residents who cannot feed themselves. Several accounts describe serious consequences such as malnutrition, dehydration, bedsores, hospital visits, ambulance removals, and at least one reviewer linking the facility to a resident death. Those issues indicate potential failures both in routine personal care and in clinical oversight.
Medication management and medical follow-up are prominent concerns. Reviews report prescriptions being withheld or delayed for days, incorrect medications being given, difficulty obtaining prescriptions, laxatives being given inappropriately, and poor coordination with doctors and insurance. Several reviewers said therapy services were not started or were delayed, labs and follow-ups were slow, and there was no effective on-call contact. Safety lapses—falls without bed alarms, premature discharges, and reports of unqualified aides performing lifts—compound clinical risks. Allegations of abusive handling, bruising, and rough care were raised multiple times, along with statements that staff sometimes acted in ways that reviewers characterized as criminal or dangerously neglectful. The pattern suggests both acute and chronic care-delivery deficits.
Communication and administration are recurring weak points. Many reviewers describe rude, unhelpful, or evasive office staff and nursing leadership; poor phone responsiveness; lack of follow-up after incidents; misleading statements about location and services; and even disrespectful handling of families and belongings after a resident’s death. There are multiple mentions of complaints filed with the Ombudsman and at least one reference to a state investigation. Billing was handled well in isolated reports, but administrative responsiveness appears inconsistent and often criticized. These administrative failings amplify clinical concerns because families feel unable to escalate issues or obtain timely answers.
At the same time, there is a substantial minority of very positive reviews describing the facility as bright, renovated, and welcoming with loving staff who provide personalized care and meaningful activities. Several families reported significant improvement in their loved one’s condition, compassionate and attentive aides, good dining experiences, and an inviting atmosphere. Some reviewers explicitly praise individual nurses and CNAs as exceptional, and one long-term pattern described an initially positive experience (first three months) with later decline—suggesting variability over time or between shifts/teams.
What emerges is a pattern of extreme variability: some residents and families report excellent, attentive care and a bright, activity-rich environment; others report neglect, unsafe practices, medication errors, abuse, and severe lapses in hygiene and dignity. Contributing factors cited include high staff turnover, underpayment, supply shortages, inconsistent leadership, and weekend/night staffing shortages. Specific operational failures mentioned often include ignored call buttons, laundry and room-cleaning mistakes, broken equipment (e.g., bed footboard, bathroom light), improper handling of personal belongings, and even vaping in hallways.
Implications for prospective families: do not rely on a single positive or negative review. The facility appears capable of providing very good care when staffing and individual caregivers are engaged, but multiple reviewers warn of systemic risks when staffing levels, leadership attention, or oversight drop. If considering this facility, prospective families should (1) ask specifically about current staffing ratios at night/weekends, (2) request recent inspection/ombudsman reports and any information about investigations, (3) get named contacts for escalation and on-call medical coverage, (4) verify medication management and therapy start dates in writing, and (5) plan frequent in-person checks, especially during the first months. The repeated and severe nature of many complaints—neglect, medication failures, safety lapses, and allegations requiring regulatory attention—warrants caution and thorough vetting before placing a vulnerable loved one in this facility.
