Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized but leans strongly negative in the accounts provided. Multiple reviewers describe severe problems with medical care administration, staffing competence, facility cleanliness, and customer service. The most serious allegations involve a manager refusing to complete necessary medical paperwork, resulting in stress and at least one reported hospital visit; reviewers specifically linked that refusal to problems with pregnancy-related medical care. These kinds of accounts point to lapses in basic care coordination and medication/medical documentation procedures that reviewers felt had real health consequences.
Care quality and staffing are central themes. Several reviews accuse the facility of providing minimal or non-existent nursing and caregiving attention: residents allegedly were left without care, reportedly lying in bed unattended until they passed away. Staff are described as unqualified by reviewers, and specific negative personal descriptions appear (one reviewer named Stacy Miller as "bitter" and "mean"). These reports convey a perception of neglect and inadequate clinical oversight rather than isolated incidents. At the same time, a minority of reviews credit newer management or leadership changes with improved service, suggesting that experiences may vary over time or between different shifts/teams.
Facility condition and housekeeping are another major concern. Multiple reviewers reported rooms that were never cleaned, pervasive bad smells, and even bedbug infestations. These complaints suggest systemic issues with environmental services and pest control. Such conditions compound the perceived neglect and can directly affect resident comfort and health. Dining was also criticized; reviewers described meals as poor, which contributes to an overall impression of substandard daily living conditions.
Customer service and admissions communication are repeatedly flagged as problematic. Reviewers said admissions staff were unresponsive, did not return calls, and that it was difficult or impossible to reach anyone by phone. Coupled with accusations that owners are uncaring, these communication breakdowns indicate organizational and managerial shortcomings in responsiveness and family relations. In contrast, some reviews emphasize positive changes attributed to new leadership or management improvements; these accounts use terms like "best service" and credit leadership with making things better, indicating that the facility may be in a transition phase with variable experiences depending on timing.
Patterns across the reviews show a mix of acute safety and quality-of-life concerns (medical paperwork refusal, alleged neglect leading to hospitalizations or death, cleanliness and pest issues) combined with chronic operational problems (poor meals, unresponsive admissions, customer service failures). The presence of both very negative and some positive reports suggests either inconsistency in care delivery across time/shifts or that recent improvements have not yet fully addressed deeply rooted problems. Any evaluation of this facility should weigh the serious nature of the negative allegations—particularly those involving medical care and neglect—while also noting that some reviewers have observed improvements under new management. Further investigation or direct verification (inspections, up-to-date licensing and complaint records, or recent family testimonials) would be prudent for anyone considering placement or employment at this facility.
