Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans positive with important and recurring caveats. A large portion of reviewers praise the staff, therapy services, and administration: many describe the clinical team as caring, patient, and family-like, and several single out therapy and rehabilitation as strong points. Administrators receive repeated positive mentions (Devonna/Devona Brown and Mrs. Leola were named), with families and employees calling leadership proactive, hands-on, and supportive. Communication with families, individualized/person-centered care, and visible improvements in resident condition are commonly reported. Many reviewers explicitly recommend the facility and say residents were treated with respect and dignity.
Staffing and workplace culture are central themes with both positive and negative notes. Numerous reviews highlight a strong team spirit, good teamwork, staff development opportunities, and a sense of pride among employees. At the same time, a clear and consistent concern is severe understaffing — reviewers frequently mention low staffing ratios, stressed and overworked staff, coworker conflicts, and instances of harassment. This understaffing is linked in several reviews to potential safety issues and to inconsistencies in the level of care; while some residents receive exemplary attention, others experience lapses or delays in service when staffing is insufficient.
Facility condition and maintenance show a split picture. Multiple reviewers describe the building as clean, well-run, and comfortable, while others report outdated infrastructure, plumbing problems, and even reports of dirty bathrooms and bugs. The term "dated facility" or "needs upgrades" appears repeatedly, indicating that while day-to-day operations and housekeeping may be adequate for many, there are tangible physical plant issues that some families and staff want addressed. These mixed observations point to variability in unit-level cleanliness and maintenance rather than a uniform condition across the campus.
Dining and activities are also mixed but tilt positive overall. Several reviewers praise the food, noting variety and good meals, and a number of comments single out activities — including dance sessions and outdoor time — as meaningful quality-of-life contributors. Conversely, a minority of reviews sharply criticize the food as "awful," showing that meal quality may vary by date, kitchen staff, or individual preferences. Activity programming is frequently cited as a strength, supporting resident engagement and enjoyment.
Management and corporate oversight receive both praise and criticism. Locally, administrators are often commended for being hands-on, proactive, and supportive; families appreciate administrators who help with placement and who communicate well. However, there are recurring critiques aimed at higher-level or corporate management and at workplace culture in some departments — comments about harassment, staff complaints, and perceived lack of corporate support suggest areas where organizational policies or resourcing may not be consistently effective.
Patterns and overall takeaway: the facility demonstrates many strong clinical and interpersonal strengths — caring staff, effective therapy, engaged administrators, and activities that residents enjoy. The most significant recurring negatives are staffing shortages, variability in cleanliness and maintenance, and inconsistent dining experiences. The reviews are somewhat polarized: many very positive endorsements coexist with a minority of severe negative reports. Anyone evaluating the facility should weigh the consistently praised elements (therapy, compassionate team members, certain administrators) against the persistent operational concerns (understaffing, building upkeep, occasional poor food). These contrast points suggest the facility can deliver high-quality, person-centered care, but that experience may depend on unit staffing levels, specific shifts, and which administrators or frontline teams are involved at a given time.
