Overall sentiment in these reviews is strongly mixed but leans negative, with multiple reviewers reporting serious and recurring problems alongside a smaller set of positive comments. The most frequently and urgently noted themes are significant cleanliness and hygiene failures, safety and abuse concerns, and staffing shortfalls. At the same time, a minority of reviewers emphasize friendly staff, a small community atmosphere, and instances of good leadership and nursing — indicating highly inconsistent experiences among residents and families.
Care quality and resident safety are major areas of concern. Several reviews allege physical abuse by another client with no corrective action by staff or management, reports of staff treating patients poorly, and an overall "lack of humanity." Call lights being ignored and claims that residents "never get showers" point to neglect and unmet basic care needs. Theft of clothing and personal items is reported, and the absence of cameras was specifically noted, which compounds worries about accountability. Neighbors and reviewers explicitly described safety concerns and even suggested closure-worthiness in at least one summary. These items collectively indicate potential systemic problems with supervision, incident response, and resident protection.
Facility condition and infection-control issues appear frequently. Reviewers used words like "filthy," cited dirty washcloths and linens, ripped shower curtains, failing showers, and an active roach problem. There are also reports of a smell of meth smoke on the premises and lack of functioning air conditioning. One reviewer mentioned wood covering windows, and another raised a "closure concern," suggesting serious maintenance and regulatory issues. Together these descriptions reflect problems with housekeeping, maintenance, pest control, ventilation, and environmental safety that could affect resident health and comfort.
Staffing, management, and culture show a polarized picture. Multiple accounts say the facility is understaffed, needs are not being met, staff are rude, cuss loudly, and the administrator is "not nice." There are also allegations of payroll cheating, which — if accurate — could indicate management or labor issues that undermine staff morale and retention. Contrastingly, some reviewers explicitly praised the staff and leadership: descriptors include "great staff," "strong leadership," and recommendations of the facility. This split suggests inconsistent staffing levels, variable staff performance or shifts, or differing expectations among reviewers.
Dining, activities, and the social environment likewise produced mixed feedback. Food was called "nasty" by at least one reviewer, which is an important quality-of-life concern. On the positive side, several comments highlight that the facility is small and that residents are familiar with one another; some reviewers said it was a "great group of residents to work with," indicating a potentially supportive peer environment for certain people. Cost concerns were mentioned, implying that reviewers question the value received relative to price.
Taken together, the reviews describe a facility with some redeeming qualities — notably a small, familiar resident community and pockets of staff who are caring and competent — but numerous serious complaints that should not be overlooked. The dominant patterns point to lapses in basic care, cleanliness, safety, and management oversight. For prospective residents or family members, these reviews suggest several due-diligence steps: observe the facility firsthand during busy periods (mealtimes and shift changes), inspect cleanliness and odors, ask about shower/hygiene schedules and staffing ratios, inquire about security measures (camera use and incident reporting), request recent state inspection and complaint records, and speak with multiple families and current residents to assess consistency of care. The polarized reviews indicate that experiences may vary widely depending on timing, staffing, and individual caregivers — so obtaining up-to-date, direct information is especially important.
