Overall sentiment in these reviews is highly mixed and polarized: a substantial number of reviewers strongly praise the people who work at Clark Rehabilitation and Skilled Nursing Center, while an equally concerning subset reports serious clinical failures, neglect, and safety lapses. The dominant positive theme is the quality of interpersonal care. Many families and residents describe staff — nurses, rehab therapists, and admissions personnel (frequently mentioning an administrator named Tim) — as compassionate, respectful, professional, and willing to go above and beyond. When staffing and operations are functioning well, reviewers note effective rehab services, consistent communication, welcoming admissions, well-lit and spacious rooms, a broad range of activities, and an overall family-like atmosphere. Multiple reviews credit specific staff with prompt issue resolution and advocacy for residents, and several accounts describe life-changing or very positive skilled-care experiences.
Counterbalancing those positives are repeated and serious clinical, safety, and operational concerns. A recurring pattern is chronic understaffing and overworked staff leading to delayed or missed care: residents reportedly experienced late or omitted medications (including pain meds), missed dialysis appointments, delayed wound care (bandages not changed), and even medications running out because of pharmacy or supply problems. Several reviews describe situations with immediate safety implications — residents yelling for help, being left lying on the floor, unsafe transfers without bed rails or proper assistance, and reports of ICU readmissions and hospitalizations where families claim they were not notified. These clinical lapses are linked in reviews to bedsores, infections, and other medically serious outcomes, which some reviewers explicitly call medical neglect.
Facility hygiene and maintenance are another major area of concern and inconsistency. Multiple reviewers report foul odors (urine in hallways), soiled or clogged toilets, feces found on arrival, and pest sightings (roaches). There are also accounts of maintenance problems — toilets running for days, heaters running constantly causing dry air, and supplies left in hallways (e.g., unopened bags of bed pads). Conversely, other reviewers describe the facility as fresh-smelling and clean, indicating a notable variability in housekeeping standards that may fluctuate by unit, time, or staffing levels.
Property and process management issues also emerged repeatedly. Several reviewers reported missing personal items (clothes, chargers) or staff instructing residents to shake clothes for roaches rather than resolving the pest problem. Some families experienced locked items or supplies that were inaccessible until staff arrived, creating safety or dignity concerns for higher-fall-risk residents. Food quality and beverage options earned mixed comments — some called meals acceptable or “not too bad,” while others described pitiful food choices and limited drink options. Administrative perception is mixed: Tim and some administrative staff receive praise for communication and advocacy, but other reviewers accuse the management of being money-focused, with accounts of medications running out due to distance to the pharmacy and perceived prioritization of finances over care.
A central theme across these reviews is inconsistency. Many reviews laud Clark for excellent, compassionate, and effective care — especially the rehab team and specific nursing staff — while a hard-to-ignore portion of reviewers describe neglect, poor hygiene, and clinically dangerous errors. The variability suggests that outcomes may depend strongly on staffing levels, specific shifts or teams, and possibly on how well management addresses individual complaints. For prospective residents and families, the reviews point to clear strengths (compassionate staff members, strong rehab when present, and an engaging activity program) but also flag serious red flags (missed medications, unsafe transfers, sanitation problems, and reports of medical neglect). Those patterns should lead families to ask specific questions about staffing ratios, medication management processes, infection control and housekeeping protocols, and how the facility handles escalation and communication during clinical events. Overall, Clark appears to offer excellent care in many cases but also carries documented and recurring risks that families should probe carefully prior to placement and monitor closely if they choose the facility.
