The reviews for Englewood Health and Rehabilitation Center are sharply divided, producing a highly mixed overall picture. A substantial portion of reviewers praise the facility for compassionate, attentive staff, strong rehab and therapy offerings, and a family-like atmosphere enabled by the small size of the facility. These positive reviewers describe staff who “go above and beyond,” mention specific staff members and administrators by name with gratitude, and highlight successful short-term and outpatient rehab outcomes. Many accounts celebrate active, resident-centered programming — car shows, proms, cookouts, birthday recognitions, and other activities — that contribute to social engagement and resident enjoyment. Several reviews also note efficient medication management and, in many cases, prompt responses to call buttons and individualized attention.
Counterbalancing those positive reports are several serious and consistent negative themes. Multiple reviewers allege neglectful care practices including inadequate bathing schedules (reports of only one bath per week), leaving residents in soiled garments, long call-light response times, and failures to meet dietary requirements. There are strong allegations of abusive or hostile staff behavior in some accounts, including threats, coercive handling of residents’ belongings, privacy invasions, discrimination, and harassment. At least one reviewer describes a near-fatal incident and a resident fleeing the facility, which elevates concerns from poor service to potential safety and regulatory issues. Understaffing and high turnover are repeated explanations for many of these problems, particularly during evenings and weekends. Several reviews also describe unprofessional conduct such as staff on their phones, rude interactions with family members, and management that does not sufficiently correct issues.
Facility condition and cleanliness receive conflicting reports. Numerous reviewers call the building very clean and well maintained—interior and exterior—and praise the pleasant environment, while others report strong, unpleasant odors and insist the facility “needs to be shut down.” Dietary experiences are similarly mixed: some reviewers praise food quality and special-event meals (noting good value at events), while others complain of awful food or unmet dietary needs. On the administrative side, several reviewers single out administrators and managers positively (naming Stephanie, Al, Wendy, Stagg), describing helpful, honest communication and goal-oriented support. Conversely, there are complaints of poor management decisions, unresolved state-level complaints, and an unpaid vendor dispute that suggests lapses in administrative follow-through.
A pattern emerges of polarized experiences that may reflect inconsistent staffing, variability between shifts, or uneven training and oversight. Many families and residents report exceptional, personalized care and thriving outcomes; others report neglectful or abusive episodes with serious safety implications. Given these contradictions, the reviews suggest the facility can deliver high-quality, compassionate care but that the quality may not be reliably consistent across all residents, times, or staff members. Prospective residents and families should weigh both the positive strengths (rehab expertise, activities, and named staff praised for compassion) and the serious negative allegations (abuse, neglect, safety incidents, and understaffing).
For a prospective family or an investigator, the most important follow-ups would be: ask for current staffing ratios by shift and staff turnover statistics; request evidence of incident reporting and outcomes for any state complaints; inquire about bathing and hygiene protocols, call-light response targets, and dietary accommodations; meet key nursing leadership and therapy directors (and ask about staff training and supervision); and tour the facility multiple times including evenings/weekends to assess consistency. The mixed but intense nature of the praise and the complaints means on-site verification and direct conversations with current residents and families are critical before making placement decisions.
