Overall sentiment across the reviews for University Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center is highly polarized: a number of reviewers report excellent clinical rehabilitation, compassionate individual caregivers, and a supportive administrative team, while an equal or larger portion describe persistent operational, safety, cleanliness, and communication failures. Positive reports tend to emphasize strong therapy results (PT/OT), attentive one-on-one care, compassionate nursing leadership, well-run activities, and in some cases clean, comfortable surroundings with good meals. Negative reports focus on basic standards not being met: inconsistent or missing medications, theft of personal items, filthy rooms, broken fixtures, and staff behavior that ranges from untrained or uncaring to hostile or retaliatory.
Care quality and clinical services show a split pattern. Many families praise therapy staff and document measurable, swift rehabilitation progress. Some nurses, CNAs, and patient techs are described as competent and kind, with particular praise for the Director of Nursing and certain administrators who are said to go above and beyond. At the same time, numerous reviews detail medication errors and delays, missing refills (including critical supplies like Dexcom), and instances where family physicians could not reach the facility. There are also troubling allegations of residents being neglected—left soiled or without timely assistance—which represent serious clinical and regulatory concerns.
Staffing, training, and professionalism are recurring themes. Several reviews describe staff who are welcoming, attentive, and professional; however, a large number of reviews report inexperienced, unprofessional, or even childish behavior from staff and aides. Short staffing is reported frequently, and many reviewers tie slow responses, long phone waits, and failures in care delivery to insufficient staffing levels. Reports of retaliation against family members, nasty attitudes from some aides, and staff inaction in response to safety incidents further undermine confidence in consistent, quality care.
Facilities, cleanliness, and environment receive very mixed feedback. Some reviewers call the facility impeccably clean and well-maintained, while others describe rooms as filthy, with trash on the floor, crumbs, stains, broken blinds, holes in doors, sinks coming off walls, and persistent urine odor. These contradictory reports suggest variability between units, shifts, or over time. Entertainment and activities are similarly mixed: activity programs, music sessions, and a nice activity room are praised, but numerous complaints exist about television failures, missed major televised events (Superbowl, Kentucky Derby) due to TV/streaming problems, and inconsistent availability of scheduled activities.
Dining and nutrition show the same split: some families describe well-prepared, nutritionally appropriate meals, while many others call the food poor, cold, or inappropriate for residents with dietary restrictions (e.g., diabetics receiving sweets). Several reviewers explicitly called the food "not fit for human intake," pointing to major dissatisfaction in dining services.
Communication, administration, and operational issues are prominent. Multiple reviewers cite poor discharge planning and communication (including missing discharge paperwork not shared with physicians), billing problems and Medicaid authorization delays, and abrupt discharges without sufficient notice. The front desk and phone responsiveness are frequent pain points—families often report unanswered calls, non-working lock codes, and delays in granting access. Allegations of theft (phones, chargers, tablet, walker, clothing) and even theft of paperwork, combined with reports of a COVID outbreak and unsafe transport/driver concerns, point to systemic operational weaknesses.
Safety is a major concern in several reviews: threats and harassment from other patients, doors being slammed, staff failing to address incidents, and alleged residents being left in human waste for hours are serious red flags. These accounts, if accurate and widespread, indicate failures in supervision, staffing, and incident response. Conversely, some reviewers explicitly state their loved ones were safe, well cared for, and happy, reinforcing the polarized nature of experiences.
In summary, University Park Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center receives strongly mixed reviews. Strengths commonly cited are effective rehabilitation therapy, compassionate and skilled individual staff members (including standout nursing leadership), and engaging activities when they are well-run. Weaknesses that recur across reviews—and are of significant concern—include medication and discharge mismanagement, inconsistent staff training and professionalism, theft and security issues, cleanliness and maintenance failures, poor communication with families and physicians, and occasional safety incidents. Prospective residents and families should recognize the variability in experiences: outcomes and satisfaction appear to depend heavily on staffing levels, specific personnel on duty, unit cleanliness, and administrative follow-through. When considering this facility, it would be prudent to ask specific, targeted questions about staffing ratios, medication management and refill policies, security and theft prevention, cleaning protocols, infection history (including recent COVID cases), discharge procedures, and how the facility handles complaints and incident reporting.
