Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized but leans toward serious concern. There are repeated, detailed allegations of neglect, poor clinical management, and safety breaches alongside a smaller but clear set of positive comments praising individual staff members and the physical appearance of the facility. The most frequently raised and severe issues include short‑staffing, poor communication with families, hygiene and infection problems, inadequate nutrition or food safety, and documented instances of medical harm such as bedsores, dehydration, infection, ICU transfers, and even death. Several reviewers explicitly advise others not to place loved ones at the facility, citing prolonged hospitalizations and life‑threatening events they attribute to the facility’s care lapses.
Care quality and outcomes are central to the negative reports. Multiple summaries cite neglectful practices: residents reportedly left in bed all day, left wet for hours, rarely showered, suffering from scabies, skin breakdown (dry, cracked, bleeding), malnutrition, and dehydration. There are specific allegations of undercooked meals (including undercooked chicken) and general complaints that food is cold or inadequate. Several reviews describe serious downstream medical consequences—ICU stays, decannulation problems, and death—attributed by families to facility negligence. These are among the most alarming and consistent themes and reflect systemic clinical and supervisory failures in some reviewers’ experiences.
Staff behavior and staffing levels are another major theme. Many reviewers report being short‑staffed with insufficient CNAs, nurses often distracted or on phones, and reports of staff yelling or being rude. Conversely, a subset of reviews strongly praise individual caregivers as kind, compassionate, knowledgeable, and attentive — indicating that quality of direct care may vary widely depending on staff on shift. Several reviewers note only a few good workers amid broader complaints. There are also allegations of dishonest or unprofessional conduct from some employees, including making up stories about residents, using others’ criminal records to smear people, and reports of missing resident clothing and money.
Facility condition and management issues show a clear split: the building and curb appeal are repeatedly complimented—reviewers call it a beautiful or amazing facility—yet these positive impressions are contradicted by multiple accounts of filth, poor hygiene, and cramped rooms (including reports of two residents sharing one TV). Management and communication are inconsistent: some reviewers praise an improving administrator and responsive managers, while others describe poor communication, difficulty coordinating care from out of state, frequent name changes of the facility, and managers who are hesitant to meet requests. The combination of attractive physical premises with troubling operational and care deficits suggests surface improvements that may not reflect consistent underlying clinical and managerial quality.
Safety, privacy, and trust concerns appear frequently and are serious. Several reviewers describe privacy breaches and unauthorized disclosure of personal information, with at least one report of fraudulent credit card activity tied to the facility—raising identity‑theft risk. Others report vaccine pressure tactics and unsafe workplace conditions for staff. COVID‑related safety concerns are also mentioned. These issues compound the clinical and interpersonal complaints and contribute to a lack of trust among many reviewers.
In summary, the reviews present a mixed but troubling portrait. Positive comments focus mainly on the building’s appearance and certain compassionate, professional staff members; these are real strengths but appear uneven. The negative reports are numerous and substantial, describing systemic staffing shortages, lapses in basic hygiene and nutrition, communication failures with families, safety and privacy breaches, and documented medical harms. The pattern suggests significant variability in resident experience: some families are satisfied and note improvements, while many others report severe neglect and harm. Anyone considering this facility should weigh the potential for attentive individual caregivers and a pleasant environment against repeated reports of neglect, clinical failures, safety risks, and management inconsistency, and should seek detailed, up‑to‑date evidence of staffing, incident histories, and regulatory records before making placement decisions.
