Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed, with strong, repeated praise for the quality of bedside caregiving and individualized attention, alongside consistent concerns about facility maintenance, management communication, and some staff professionalism. Many families emphasize that direct-care staff — nurses, aides, and cottage-team caregivers — provided compassionate, personalized care that resulted in measurable improvements in residents’ mood, socialization, and functional recovery. Several reviews note excellent rehabilitation outcomes (including after knee replacement), staff who learn residents’ names, engaging activities (dancing, looking at photos, social programs), and an overall sense of dignity and respect that brought peace of mind to families. Cleanliness and a homelike atmosphere are also mentioned positively by multiple reviewers, and some families explicitly describe a high-quality or five-star experience.
At the same time, multiple reviewers report troubling operational and managerial problems. The physical plant is described as deteriorating in places: loose paneling, patched but unfinished walls, loose plaster, and amateur AC drain line work. These maintenance issues suggest inconsistent facility upkeep that some families found disconcerting. Communication gaps appear frequently: medical notes not passed on, delayed home health care notifications, missed or cancelled doctor appointments, and inadequate transport for larger patients. There are also reports of personal property being lost and inadequate follow-through by management, which undermines trust for some families.
Staffing and professionalism show a split picture. Many frontline staff are praised as caring and invested in residents’ well-being, but other comments point to aides perceived as there only for a paycheck, unprofessional behavior from specific staff members, and front-desk or phone representatives who frustrate callers. One reviewer reported a nurse laughing at concerns and alleged neglect or inaction serious enough that a complaint was filed with the state. Night-shift staffing and a need for more training or retraining are called out specifically for the Alzheimer’s unit, suggesting uneven staff performance across shifts and units.
Clinical care and therapy delivery also produced mixed feedback. Several families lauded the rehabilitation programs and coaching that helped residents regain function, while at least one reviewer described forced daily physical therapy, frequent nighttime nurse calls that disrupted sleep, confinement to a wheelchair, and a sense of being stuck with no clear discharge destination. Dining experiences are similarly inconsistent: some reviewers praise the food and report that their loved ones are eating well, while others find the meals unpalatable. Cost is another concern cited explicitly by one reviewer who mentioned a monthly charge of roughly $10,000, which — combined with reports of lost items and communication failures — contributed to the recommendation against using the facility.
Patterns and overall impression: the facility appears capable of providing genuinely compassionate, effective hands-on care in many cases, especially in certain units (for example, the cottage and specific rehab programs). That strength seems to be carried by committed caregivers and some strong nursing staff. However, recurring problems with management, communication, maintenance, and inconsistent professionalism create enough friction that experiences vary widely between families and units. Prospective residents and families should weigh the consistently positive reports about direct resident care and rehabilitation against the documented operational shortcomings. Recommendations for families considering this facility would include: ask detailed questions about unit-specific staffing (day vs night), observe maintenance and cleanliness in person, clarify discharge and home-health processes, confirm transport capabilities for specific mobility needs, and get written policies on property handling and communication protocols.
