Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly mixed and polarized. Multiple reviewers praise the staff—describing caregivers as kind, compassionate, hardworking and pleasant—and highlight an effective therapy department that produced good results for some residents. Several families report smooth admissions, good communication about care changes, and being very satisfied or highly recommending the facility. Those positive accounts emphasize personal interactions with staff, the competence of therapy teams, and in some cases a clean, friendly environment.
However, a substantial portion of the reviews raises serious concerns about facility condition, hygiene, safety and clinical responsiveness. Several reviewers describe very poor cleanliness (dead bugs, spiders and cobwebs, crumbs under beds, crusty toilets) and state the environment felt unacceptable. Safety and neglect issues are reported, including residents being found on the floor, soiled diapers left unattended, and inadequate monitoring—reports that indicate potential fall and infection risks and inadequate supervision. These issues are serious red flags and are mentioned alongside statements that residents “deserve better” and that the facility “should be shut down.”
Clinical responsiveness and staffing emerge as another major theme. Some reviewers describe nurses who refused to contact a physician or delays in getting medical attention, and they specifically note problems when physicians were unavailable on weekends. Phone communication and responsiveness is repeatedly criticized—family members reported difficulty reaching staff by phone and poor weekend coverage. Several reviews explicitly cite short staffing as a driver of poor care and delayed attention. This combination of limited access to clinicians, poor phone responsiveness, and staffing shortages appears to be a recurrent contributor to negative experiences.
Additional operational and quality-of-life concerns include inactive or insufficient activities programming and problems with food service. Multiple reviewers describe activities as inactive or lacking, reducing resident engagement. Dining complaints include meals being unappetizing, not nutritious, and not reliably delivered as ordered. At the same time, other reviewers say the facility was very clean and the care was great, which points to inconsistent experiences across residents or possible variability across units or time periods.
Taken together, the reviews depict a facility with a pronounced split in experiences: many family members are very satisfied—particularly with therapy and the interpersonal qualities of staff—while others report significant and potentially serious problems with hygiene, supervision, clinical responsiveness, communication and dining. The pattern suggests uneven quality of care and operations rather than uniformly good or bad performance.
For prospective residents and families, these patterns indicate the importance of an in-person visit and targeted questions before placement: observe cleanliness in resident rooms and common areas, ask about housekeeping schedules and pest control, inquire about nurse call response times and weekend physician coverage, request staffing ratios, review fall-prevention and monitoring protocols, ask about activities schedules and recent participation, and sample or observe meal service reliability and nutrition. Families currently involved with the facility who have safety or hygiene concerns should document incidents, escalate promptly to leadership, and consider contacting local ombudsman or regulatory bodies if immediate risks to resident safety or neglect are suspected.
In summary, Macomb Post Acute Care Center earns strong praise from some families—especially for therapy and certain staff members—but also receives multiple, serious complaints about cleanliness, supervision, clinical responsiveness, communication and dining. The overall picture is one of inconsistency: excellent experiences for some and troubling lapses for others. Those patterns merit careful scrutiny by anyone considering placement and urgent attention from facility management to the cited systemic issues.
