Overall sentiment in the reviews for The Ivy at Davenport is highly mixed and polarized, with a wide range of strongly positive and strongly negative experiences. Multiple reviewers praise individual caregivers, therapy staff, and activity personnel for compassionate, effective, and family-like care. At the same time, other reviews describe serious safety, sanitation, and clinical-care problems including neglect, medical mishandling, and regulatory concerns. These two narratives appear repeatedly, suggesting significant inconsistency in resident experience that may depend on shift, unit, or timeframe.
Care quality and clinical issues: Many reviews identify outstanding individual clinical staff — CNAs, nurses, a nurse practitioner, and therapists — who provide attentive bedside care and effective rehabilitation; several reviewers credit the therapy department with helping residents regain mobility. Conversely, there are also alarming reports of neglect, delayed or inadequate treatment, and even allegations of malpractice and sepsis. Specific clinical failures cited include missed dialysis and other medical appointments, ER visits made without the facility notifying families, delays in antibiotic administration, and residents being left without timely assistance. These reports raise concerns about both immediate bedside care and clinical oversight.
Staffing, leadership, and communication: A dominant negative theme is understaffing and unstable leadership. Multiple reviewers describe chronic understaffing (with evening coverage called out), slow response times to calls (one report ~45 minutes), overworked employees, and staff morale problems. Several reviews call out frequent turnover in the Director of Nursing role and describe inconsistent nursing leadership, which reviewers link to breakdowns in coordinated care and poor communication with families. Positive reports exist as well: some families praise a proactive social worker, an informative head of nursing, and staff who provide 24/7 monitoring and immediate problem notifications. However, the balance of comments suggests uneven management and significant variability in the quality of communication and clinical coordination.
Safety, sanitation, and facility maintenance: Facility and environmental issues are a major area of concern for many reviewers. Complaints include pest problems (fruit flies, cockroaches), mold in dishes, filthy rooms, dirty laundry, and maintenance failures such as unrepaired sink drains, missing faucet handles, and toilets not flushing. Positive comments about maintenance and a clean, organized environment appear in other reviews, again underlining inconsistency. Several reviews recount troubling incidents implying risk to resident safety — residents left without needed care, or in "bagging for help" scenarios — which, combined with allegations of regulatory violations and ongoing legal/case activity, suggest that families should carefully investigate current inspection and enforcement records.
Dining and housekeeping: Dining reviews are split. Some residents and families report meals are acceptable and dietary staff respond to needs, while others report poor food quality: cold meals, lack of protein options, milk shortages, and kitchen understaffing. Housekeeping also receives mixed feedback: some reviewers praise housekeeping staff, while others report crumbs on floors, filthy rooms, and moldy dishes.
Activities and social services: Activities and social services emerge as relative strengths in many accounts. Multiple reviewers name staff (notably Dawn and other activities personnel) who run varied programming including film screenings, biblical discussions, and social opportunities; these elements are described as creating a warm, family-like atmosphere that makes some residents reluctant to leave. Several families explicitly praise social services and business office responsiveness and list staff who quickly resolve issues.
Staff professionalism and workplace environment: Reviews describe both exceptional and poor staff behavior. Positive comments highlight respectful, joking, and dedicated staff who "treat residents like family" and deserve reward; some employees say it is a good place to work with decent benefits. In contrast, other reviews describe rude, unprofessional, and even threatening staff behavior (with one staff member named negatively), and accounts of employees wanting to quit due to short staffing and stress.
Patterns and takeaways: The most notable pattern is high variability — departments and individual employees can be excellent (especially therapy and some CNAs/nurses and activities staff), while systemic issues (staffing, leadership turnover, sanitation, maintenance, and serious clinical lapses) recur in multiple negative reviews. Several reviews reference regulatory violations, ongoing cases, and fines; combined with allegations of theft and inaccurate billing, these raise red flags about administrative oversight.
For families considering The Ivy at Davenport, these reviews suggest several prudent steps: visit multiple times and across different shifts; ask for current staffing ratios and leadership stability (length of tenure for the DON and nursing leaders); request documentation of incident reports, infection-control measures, and state inspection results; meet therapy staff and ask for measurable rehab outcomes; verify communication protocols for families and the procedure for medical emergencies and transfers; and identify responsive contacts in social services or the business office (some reviewers named Dawn and Leann positively). In short, while many individual staff members and departments receive high praise, the recurring and serious negative themes around safety, sanitation, clinical management, and leadership instability mean families should conduct thorough, current due diligence before placement.
