The reviews of Tanglewood Health and Rehabilitation are highly polarized, with strong praise from some families and residents alongside severe criticism from others. The most consistent positive thread is the rehabilitation program: multiple reviewers credit therapy staff with helping residents regain mobility and return home, sometimes noting that staff went out of their way to secure insurance approvals and prevent additional transfers. Several reviews describe compassionate, dedicated employees—both nursing and support staff—who provide attentive, family-style care. The facility is also reported to offer a lively activities program (patio time, monthly outings, bingo, shopping trips) and, in some accounts, a clean and welcoming lobby and décor. A few reviewers specifically praise an administrative team and cite a four-star CMS rating and a continuous quality improvement program, which suggests that the facility has formal structures in place to monitor quality.
Counterbalancing the praise are numerous, detailed complaints about basic care, staffing, sanitation, and safety. A large portion of reviews allege inadequate nursing care: slow or unanswered call lights, inattentive or rude staff, medication mistakes, and instances where basic needs (water, feeding, bathing, bathroom access) were not met. Several reviews describe emergency-level consequences, such as dehydration requiring hospital readmission, untreated injuries after falls, and medication errors. Understaffing is a recurrent theme—reports of one nurse covering dozens of patients and CNAs missing or taking long lunches—leading reviewers to attribute neglect and delayed responses to insufficient staffing and poor backup coverage.
Sanitation and infection-control concerns appear frequently and are among the most alarming themes. Multiple reviewers report persistent urine and fecal odors, dirty floors and bedding, pests in furniture, and meals or kitchen conditions they consider unsanitary. Some accounts say rooms were never cleaned, bedside tables contained soiled items, and patients were exposed to unsanitary conditions without appropriate protective measures (gloves/masks). These descriptions, combined with reports of unclean bed/diaper use and complaints about the kitchen, contribute to allegations that the facility fails to meet basic hygiene and dignity standards.
Management and organizational issues are reported inconsistently but significantly. While some reviews praise administration for responsiveness and family-centered teamwork, others describe defensive administrators, policy misrepresentation, and staff dishonesty. Several reviewers mention filing state complaints or planning to file complaints with medical boards. There are also adamant, emotionally charged allegations—ranging from descriptions of the facility as a "death trap" or "nursing concentration camp" to calls for shutdown—which indicate severe distrust among some families. At the same time, other reviewers explicitly counter that narrative, saying management was amazing and staff saved their loved one from further transitions.
Dining, activities, and environment produce mixed impressions. Activities and outings are frequently described positively and viewed as meaningful to resident quality of life. Food is generally described as "OK" or criticized (lousy food, denied diets). A notable and specific complaint is denial of diet alternatives for patients with diabetes or cardiac diets. The physical environment is described variably—some report a clean, pleasant decoration and organized lobby, while others report filthy rooms and strong odors. This inconsistency suggests significant variability in conditions across units, shifts, or over time.
Overall sentiment is sharply divided: some families describe exceptional rehabilitation outcomes, attentive therapy, and caring staff, while others describe systemic neglect, hygiene failures, under-staffing, and safety incidents. The recurring patterns indicate that quality likely fluctuates—possibly due to staffing levels, shift-to-shift differences, site management, or turnover. Reviews also reference institutional indicators (a four-star CMS rating, a continuous improvement program) that contrast with multiple complaint narratives, highlighting a gap between official metrics and some families' lived experiences.
Recommendations for prospective residents and families based on these themes: arrange an unannounced visit and observe multiple shifts (including evening/night) to assess cleanliness, call-response times, and staff interactions; ask for recent inspection/complaint histories and any corrective-action plans; confirm staffing ratios, nurse availability, and backup coverage; inquire specifically about diet accommodations, hydration protocols, incontinence management, and fall-prevention procedures; speak directly with therapy staff about expected outcomes and readmission prevention; and request references from recent families who have completed rehab-to-home transitions. Given the intensity and severity of some allegations, verify current conditions rather than relying solely on older reviews or a single tour.
In summary, Tanglewood Health and Rehabilitation elicits strong praise for rehabilitation and for some exemplary staff and administrative practices, but the facility also receives numerous and serious complaints about sanitation, neglect, understaffing, medication and diet issues, and inconsistent management. The pattern suggests highly variable resident experiences; due diligence—focused observation, up-to-date regulatory records, and direct questions about staffing and clinical protocols—is essential for anyone considering placement there.
