Overall impression: The reviews for Christina House/Cedar Creek of Franklin (also referenced as Cedarhurst in some reviews) show a polarized picture: a majority of comments reflect a warm, home-like assisted living community with caring staff, plentiful activities, useful amenities, and many satisfied families; however, a meaningful minority of reviews report significant problems ranging from inconsistent care and understaffing to serious neglect and administrative/financial concerns. The overall sentiment is that the facility can deliver strong, personalized assisted living services — but performance appears variable across time, shifts, and rooms, and prospective families should be prepared to investigate specifics.
Care quality and staffing: Many reviewers praise the caregiving staff as compassionate, responsive and available, noting that residents are known by name, receive help with bathing, dressing and hygiene, and that family health notifications and medical coordination (including a visiting doctor and in-house therapy) are positives. Several accounts highlight stable, long-tenured caregivers and cooks who contribute to a family-like environment. At the same time, frequent concerns about understaffing and staff turnover appear across multiple summaries. Reported consequences include delayed responses to calls, dropped or mishandled transfers (one review mentioned a resident being dropped in the shower), residents left in bed or not assisted to meals, and weekend short-staffing. A few reviews describe very serious neglect or abuse allegations; while these appear to be outliers relative to the many positive comments, they are severe enough to be notable and suggest that oversight and staffing consistency have not always been reliable.
Facilities and amenities: The facility’s physical environment receives mostly positive mentions. Positive specifics include a clean and well-kept building, pleasant/homey smells, a closed-square design with an open courtyard, two courtyards, a bistro/cafe area, salon, gym, well-equipped exercise room, accessible massage therapy table, and a rehab/therapy area. Several reviewers report recent renovations (new roof, landscaping, new floors) and an engaged maintenance staff. Apartment types (studios and one-bedrooms) are described as functional and private, with some reviewers specifically noting that the smaller size supports social integration and reduces overwhelm for new residents. However, there are mixed reports: a minority describe older building problems — dirty carpet, leaks, missing shingles and bad odors — indicating inconsistent maintenance or uneven conditions between rooms or over time.
Dining and food service: Dining opinions vary widely. Many reviewers praise the cooks and describe good or even excellent food, accommodating cooks, and enjoyable meals/events (including family dinners and ice cream desserts). Others report recurring problems: meals arriving cold, limited menu variety, small portions, inconsistent meal provision (missed meals), and declining food quality. This inconsistency suggests that dining quality may depend on specific staff shifts, dayparts (weekend vs weekday), or management of the kitchen staff. Several families recommended confirming meal policies, portion sizes, and handling of special dietary needs during a tour.
Activities and social life: Activity programming is consistently cited as a strength. Reviewers list robust calendars with crafts, bingo, trivia, movies, trips, group exercise, karaoke, chair exercise routines, and staff-facilitated participation. Many residents and families report that the activities staff are energetic and create a lively dining room and gathering spaces, contributing to resident engagement and satisfaction. The smaller community size is frequently framed as a benefit for social integration, making it easier to meet residents and form friendships.
Management, communication and administration: Several reviewers mention a positive, responsive management presence and specific staff (directors, marketing staff, admissions personnel) who made strong impressions during tours and admissions. Some reviews explicitly reference a change in management/ownership (Christina Place to Cedar Creek of Franklin/Cedarhurst), with multiple reports stating that things improved after the change. Conversely, many comments cite problematic communication between nursing staff and families, price increases without perceived value, unclear billing (e.g., extra daily charges for nursing/therapy not included in base rate), and promises not kept. These administrative concerns, combined with reported staff turnover, appear to be a recurring theme and a major factor driving dissatisfaction among some families.
Safety and clinical concerns: While many families report feeling that loved ones are safe and well cared for, several serious safety-related complaints appear in the reviews: observed neglect (left in bed, not fed), unsafe transfer practices (ripping waistband, wedgies, or improper handling), and lack of proper lift/equipment. There is at least one review describing aggressive negligence/abuse and another noting a dropped resident in the shower. These incidents contrast sharply with other reports of prompt medical attention and proactive problem-solving, underscoring inconsistent clinical practice and the importance of confirming staffing levels, training, and incident response protocols.
Patterns and variability: The reviews demonstrate substantial variability: many families are highly satisfied, citing warmth, high-quality care, and active resident life, while other reviews highlight unacceptable lapses. Some of this variability correlates with reported staff turnover, management changes, weekends vs weekdays, and possibly different wings or rooms. A number of reviews explicitly say the facility was “better since management change,” which suggests that leadership stability may materially affect resident experience.
Pricing and value: Pricing and extra charges are a recurring concern: some reviewers feel the community is expensive for the level of service received, with reports of high supplemental fees for therapy/hospice and nursing services that weren’t clearly included. Conversely, other families find the pricing reasonable for the intimate, home-like environment and supportive services. Prospective residents should clarify what is included in base rent, what incurs additional fees, and how therapy/hospice and nursing services are billed.
Recommendations for prospective families: Based on the patterns in reviews, a careful, in-person tour is essential. Ask to see multiple apartment examples (and the areas where negative maintenance issues were reported), observe meal service and activity programming firsthand (including a weekend visit if possible), inquire about staffing ratios and turnover rates, confirm lift/equipment availability and staff training on transfers, request copies of recent incident reports or satisfaction surveys if available, and get clear written details about which services are included versus billed separately. Verify how management communicates with families and what system exists for escalation when care lapses occur. Because moving can be stressful for older adults, many reviewers also emphasized that a small, well-organized campus and attentive admissions staff can ease the transition when the facility is performing well.
Bottom line: Christina House/Cedar Creek of Franklin appears capable of providing a warm, active and personalized assisted living experience with strong amenities, engaged staff, and robust activities for many residents. However, inconsistent care, staffing shortages, administrative/financial opacity, and occasional serious safety concerns reported by some families make it essential that prospective residents thoroughly vet current staffing stability, dining and therapy arrangements, maintenance conditions, and incident-handling procedures before committing. Many families report excellent outcomes and recommend the community, but a nontrivial set of reviews describe issues significant enough to warrant careful due diligence.
