The reviews for Generations at Peoria present a strongly polarized picture: many reviewers describe excellent, compassionate care and outstanding therapy services, while a significant number report serious lapses in safety, cleanliness, and basic caregiving. Across the dataset there are recurring themes of high-quality short-term rehab, strong personal attention from specific staff members, and a warm, family-like atmosphere produced by engaged activities and social programming. Conversely, there are multiple, detailed accounts of neglect, abuse, medication and diet errors, and unsanitary conditions that raise substantial safety concerns.
Care quality and therapy: One of the most consistently praised aspects is the physical and occupational therapy program. Multiple reviewers credited the therapy teams with measurable recovery — examples include walking long distances with a walker, healed bedsores, and successful discharges home. Therapy staff are often described as skilled, encouraging, and effective. Alongside these successes, however, are reports of wasted therapy days, premature release from rehab, and cases where residents regressed after their stay. Wound care is another divided area: some reviews highlight excellent wound nurses and healing outcomes, while others describe inadequate wound treatment that contributed to severe complications, including infection and loss of toes.
Staff and culture: A dominant positive thread is that many staff members are kind, attentive, and treat residents like family. Numerous reviewers named specific caregivers and administrators (e.g., Kenny, Tasha, Tina, Melissa) as compassionate and effective. There are also comments indicating improved staff morale under newer ownership and culture initiatives that empower employees. Contrastingly, several serious complaints describe abusive or uncaring behavior — verbal swearing at residents, physical aggression (thrown objects, bruises), refusal to assist with basic needs, and medication denial. These negative reports suggest major variability in staff conduct and possible problems with training, supervision, or staffing levels that allow harmful behavior to occur.
Facilities and cleanliness: Many reviews praise the physical accommodations: large rooms, private rooms with bathrooms between beds, ample storage, flat-screen TVs, and a pleasant dining room with views. Remodeling efforts and newly redone dining areas were frequently mentioned as improvements. Nevertheless, a substantial number of reviews report unsanitary conditions: urine and bathroom odors, smelly drawers, food remnants on chairs, daily cleaning labeled as poor, and an older building in need of maintenance (noisy downspouts, banging on windows). The co-existence of 'very clean' and 'dirty/unsanitary' reports indicates inconsistent housekeeping standards across units or shifts.
Dining and nutrition: Many families appreciated meal choices, accommodations for dietary restrictions, and homemade-style food. Yet several reviewers described critical failures — wrong diets being served for multiple days, food withheld, and dietary charting not being updated — which they linked to health deterioration. These dietary mistakes, when combined with medication or wound-care failures, contributed to severe negative outcomes for some residents.
Activities and resident life: Positive accounts emphasize an engaged social program: card and puzzle groups, music and entertainment during Happy Hour, themed spirit weeks, and family-inclusive events. These programs contributed to a lively atmosphere and resident engagement. Reported improvements in staff morale and leadership attention often correlated with better activity programming and happier residents.
Management and communication: Ownership and leadership receive mixed reviews. Several reviewers applaud new ownership and administrators who are hands-on, transparent, and responsive; those accounts credit leadership with improving staff culture and resident happiness. On the other hand, there are repeated complaints about poor communication from business managers or corporate offices, slow responses to concerns, and lack of transparency around incidents. Some reviewers said issues improved after direct conversations with management, suggesting responsiveness when problems are escalated — but others reported no satisfactory resolution.
Safety and clinical governance: Serious safety concerns appear multiple times: falls, lost dentures or clothes, bruises, alleged physical aggression, and delayed or incorrect emergency responses. Some reviewers questioned staff qualifications and emergency protocols. There are also reports of medication denial and unacceptable delays in basic care (e.g., leaving residents in wet diapers), which raises red flags about supervision, staffing ratios, and clinical oversight. These issues are serious and were cited often enough to be a central area of concern.
Patterns and overall impression: The dominant pattern is inconsistency. Many positive reviews attribute excellent outcomes to specific, committed caregivers and a strong therapy department; many negative reviews describe harm resulting from other staff members, poor housekeeping, or managerial lapses. This suggests that resident experience at Generations at Peoria may depend heavily on which staff are present, unit conditions, and how effectively leadership enforces policies and training. The facility shows clear strengths — particularly in rehab/therapy and in the culture created by certain staff and new ownership — but also carries risks documented by multiple reviewers related to cleanliness, basic caregiving, nutrition management, and safety.
What prospective families should consider: Ask for specifics about staffing ratios, turnover, training, incident reporting, and supervision practices. Request documentation of wound-care protocols, dietary ordering processes, and how therapy plans and discharge timing are determined. Visit multiple times and on different shifts to assess consistency of cleanliness and staff responsiveness. If possible, identify and speak with the therapy team and named staff praised in reviews. Finally, weigh positive accounts of successful rehab and individualized compassion against the severity and recurrence of reported safety and neglect incidents; the mixed nature of reviews indicates due diligence is particularly important when considering placement at this community.
