Overall sentiment: Reviews for Matthews Memorial Health Care are highly polarized. A substantial number of reviewers report positive experiences highlighting cleanliness, friendly and caring staff, a strong therapy/rehab program, and generally good food and facilities. At the same time, an equally loud set of reviewers describe serious and systemic problems: neglect of basic care, unsafe practices, theft, unprofessional and sometimes abusive staff behavior, and management that is defensive or unhelpful. The volume and severity of negative allegations coexist with numerous specific positive reports, indicating wide variability in experiences.
Care quality and safety: Several reviews raise serious safety and care-quality concerns. Multiple accounts allege failures to provide basic personal care (for example, not changing catheter bags for days), long hours-long waits for assistance, ignored fall alarms, and residents left in soiled clothing. There are also reports of broken equipment (beds), lack of basic supplies such as towels, and cold or poor-quality food in some cases. These kinds of allegations suggest possible deficiencies in staffing levels, training, or supervision during some shifts. Conversely, many other reviewers describe their loved ones as well cared for, receiving excellent or attentive nursing care and rehabilitation services. This split suggests inconsistent care quality that may vary by unit, shift, or over time.
Staff behavior and professionalism: Reviews repeatedly mention both highly positive and highly negative staff characteristics. Positive comments emphasize professional, kind, courteous, and helpful CNAs, nurses, and therapy staff who go the extra mile, assist with belongings, and create a welcoming atmosphere. Those reviews often note clean rooms, well-groomed residents, and staff responsiveness. In contrast, numerous negative reviews describe unprofessional and disrespectful staff behavior: yelling at residents, poor bedside manner, rude interactions with families, administrators interrogating visitors or demanding IDs, and alleged withholding of items (nurses snatching orders). There are also very serious allegations of staff substance use (staff and kitchen staff being drunk or high) and reports of food theft by kitchen personnel. Because these are allegations drawn from reviews, they are unverified here, but they are repeated enough to be notable red flags for prospective families.
Management, administration, and regulatory concerns: Several reviewers accuse management of being profit-driven, unhelpful, or dismissive when concerns are raised. Some reviews allege excuses, cover-ups, or regulatory noncompliance and express distrust of leadership. At least one review notes a new administrator who is taking a positive, hands-on approach, and some reviewers expressly call for leadership changes. The mix of comments suggests variability in administrative responsiveness and culture; where leadership is seen as engaged and responsive, reviews trend positive, whereas perceptions of denial or defensiveness correlate with severe negative reports.
Facilities, meals, and environment: Many reviewers praise the facility's cleanliness, lack of odors, pleasant environment, and security — citing impressive security and a positive first impression. The therapy department gets repeated praise, and several reviewers recommend the facility for rehabilitation and long-term care. Meal quality is mixed: while several reviewers say the food is great, others report cold meals, poor kitchen practices, and even alleged food theft and substance misuse by kitchen staff. There are also reports of the facility's outward appearance being misleading compared to internal care quality, pointing to concerns about superficial impressions versus day-to-day care.
Patterns and variability: The reviews show a clear pattern of inconsistent experiences. Positive reports cluster around clean facilities, attentive therapy staff, and friendly caregiving during certain visits or for certain residents. Negative reports focus on neglect, safety lapses, theft, and serious staff misconduct allegations. This variability could reflect differences in shifts, units, staff turnover, the timeframe of the reviews (some mention a new administrator), or differences between short-term rehab stays and long-term care. The presence of both glowing and grave complaints suggests that prospective residents and families may get very different experiences depending on timing and personnel.
Notable red flags and recommendations for families: The most concerning recurring themes are alleged neglect (missed catheter care, unattended falls), theft from residents, reports of staff substance impairment, and management that may be dismissive of complaints. These are serious issues and should be investigated further by anyone considering placement. Conversely, the strong and repeated praise for the therapy department, cleanliness, and many compassionate staff members indicates there are legitimate strengths. Prospective families should conduct in-person visits across different shifts, speak with multiple families and current residents, review recent state inspection and deficiency reports, ask about staffing ratios and turnover, inquire specifically about handling of falls, catheter and incontinence care, dietary accommodations, infection control (including COVID policies), background checks, substance-use policies, and incident reporting procedures. Ask whether there have been documented allegations or regulatory citations and how the facility addressed them.
Bottom line: Matthews Memorial Health Care has a mix of highly positive reviews praising cleanliness, friendly professional staff, and strong rehabilitation services, and very serious negative reviews citing neglect, safety failures, theft, substance-use allegations, and unhelpful management. The balance of themes points to uneven care quality and potential systemic issues during some periods or shifts. Given the gravity of the negative allegations reported by multiple reviewers, families should perform thorough due diligence and verify current conditions and regulatory status before making placement decisions.
