Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans strongly toward concern and criticism, particularly about care quality, staffing, cleanliness, and the physical condition of the facility. Multiple reviewers describe serious lapses in basic care—delayed responses to falls, residents left in soiled conditions for hours, bruising and battered clients, and reports of rooms being mixed up or residents being left at nursing stations. These are recurring themes and indicate systemic problems in day-to-day resident care and monitoring rather than isolated incidents.
Staffing is one of the most frequently cited problems. Reviews repeatedly describe chronic short-staffing and heavy reliance on external or agency staff. Several accounts say there were times when no staff were available, and in the dementia unit staff were left alone responsible for roughly ten clients. These staffing shortages are linked directly to care failures: delayed assistance for residents who require two-person transfers, inadequate supervision for people with dementia, and long response times after falls. A few reviewers, however, explicitly call out individual staff members as helpful, caring, and compassionate, suggesting that while many frontline caregivers try to do their best, systemic staffing and management issues hamper consistent, safe care.
Hygiene, cleanliness, and safety concerns are also prominent. Reports include uncleaned accidents, feces in surrounding areas, pest-control problems, and a generally unhealthy environment. Reviewers describe the building as dated and deteriorated, and some statements indicate conditions worsened after the facility closed. The physical plant appears to be a significant problem: tile and drywall removal, costly repairs, and statements that the building is slated for demolition or will never reopen after utilities were disconnected underscore the severity of the facility’s infrastructure decline.
Dining and daily living were criticized as well. Several reviews describe the dining room as chaotic with a terrible atmosphere; food quality is frequently called out as poor. While activities are mentioned as available and some families appreciated programming, the dining experience and food service appear to be areas needing improvement and may reflect the broader resource constraints that affect many aspects of care.
Management and organizational issues emerge repeatedly: misrepresentation of what the facility could provide, perceptions of profit-driven decision making, and declining conditions after closure. Some reviewers say the facility deteriorated since it was closed, to the point of being in deplorable condition. The presence of both negative and positive comments—some families report a smooth transition and no complaints—suggests variability in experiences that likely depends on the specific unit, staff on duty at a given time, and timing relative to the facility’s operational decline.
In summary, the reviews paint a picture of a facility with significant, systemic problems centered on staffing shortages, inconsistent and sometimes dangerous care practices, poor cleanliness and building maintenance, and management shortcomings. These issues are counterbalanced by reports from some families of caring staff members, reasonable affordability, available activities, and proximity to family. However, the weight of negative reports—especially those describing neglect, unsafe conditions for people with dementia, and an overall deteriorated building now closed and slated for demolition—are dominant and indicate the facility was unsafe or unsuitable for many residents. Any consideration of this facility should take into account the serious safety and infrastructure concerns highlighted repeatedly, and the fact that the site has been closed and utilities disconnected according to reviewers.
