Overall sentiment toward Pine Meadows Post Acute is deeply mixed, with strong, repeated praise for the facility's rehabilitation services and many reports of excellent, compassionate care, set against a set of serious and recurring safety and management concerns. A substantial portion of reviewers highlight the effectiveness of rehab therapy and the dedication of therapy staff: patients often made rapid progress, improved mobility and physical abilities, and were discharged home sooner than expected. Several families and patients complimented doctors on patients' strength gains, and some reviewers specifically noted smooth admissions and successful transitions from short-term rehab to assisted living. These positive accounts frequently mention private rooms, friendly staff, good food, and up-to-date medical equipment — and several reviewers called out the facility as very clean with prompt repairs when needed.
Contrasting these positive reports are multiple, severe allegations and patterns of neglect and poor responsiveness. Several reviewers describe incidents where patients were ignored for 15–20 minutes while calling for help, with nurses perceived as rude or dismissive and assertions that staff failed to respond without outside calls or family intervention. Most alarming are reports that indicate neglect or possible abuse — bruises, pressure sores, and accounts of residents left naked and not changed for days. These reports include explicit statements that care was dehumanizing and that residents' needs were not being prioritized. Some reviewers summarized their overall experience with a very low rating (1/5), emphasizing safety concerns and the risk of harm posed by current staffing or practices.
Staffing and consistency emerge as a central theme explaining the divergent experiences. Many reviews praise particular caregivers, nurse aides, and therapists as compassionate, professional, and willing to go above and beyond, describing a cohesive, familial team. Yet other reviews point to dangerously low staffing ratios and systemic understaffing that appears to produce delayed responses, inconsistent monitoring, and quality lapses. This juxtaposition suggests variability by shift, unit, or time period — where some teams and shifts deliver strong, attentive care while others appear overwhelmed or inattentive. There are also administrative complaints, including concerns around enforcement of vaccination policies (some reviewers saying not all staff are vaccinated) and criticisms of the administrative office as not performing adequately when issues arise.
Facility condition and environment receive mixed feedback as well. Several reviewers praise cleanliness and modern medical equipment, with maintenance requests handled immediately. Conversely, other reviewers describe an old, dingy appearance in places — referencing a 1960s look, rotten trees on the property, flies, and urine odors. These conflicting observations again point to variability in experience; parts of the building or certain times may be well-maintained while other areas or periods suffer neglect.
Dining, daily life, and transitions have more positive-noted elements: food was liked by some residents, and several reviewers saw clear improvements in quality of life and mental state during their stay. Positive accounts also highlight successful coordination across departments and respectful treatment of staff members themselves, suggesting strong pockets of teamwork and morale. However, the reviews do not provide consistent information about activities programming or longer-term assisted living quality beyond the positive transition reports.
Taken together, the reviews indicate two prevailing realities: when the therapy teams and direct care staff are fully engaged and adequately staffed, Pine Meadows can deliver outstanding rehabilitation outcomes and compassionate care; when staffing is insufficient or administrative oversight falters, serious safety and neglect issues can occur. The presence of multiple reports of neglect, poor responsiveness, and safety risks is particularly important and should be treated as red flags for prospective residents and families.
If you are evaluating Pine Meadows, these reviews suggest specific due diligence steps: tour the facility at multiple times (including evenings and weekends), ask about current staffing ratios and turnover, request recent state inspection and deficiency reports, inquire about wound care and fall-prevention protocols, ask how call-response times are measured and enforced, and confirm vaccination and infection-control policies. Also talk to families of current residents and request documentation of how complaints are handled. The mixed but polarized nature of the feedback means experiences can vary dramatically; verify current conditions and oversight before making placement decisions.
