Overall sentiment across reviewers is highly polarized: many families and residents praise Resthaven Nursing & Rehabilitation Center for its attractive facility, amenities, and compassionate frontline staff, while a substantial number of reviews report serious administrative, billing, safety, and clinical concerns. The facility consistently receives positive comments about its physical environment and social programs, but serious red flags about management, communication, and inconsistent care quality appear frequently and repeatedly.
Facilities and amenities are among the most frequently praised aspects. Multiple reviewers describe Resthaven as a very beautiful, clean, and professionally maintained building with a wide range of on-site amenities uncommon in typical nursing homes: a movie theater, large chapel/place of worship, sports/lounge area, indoor and outdoor walking paths, and pleasant dining facilities. Rooms are described as unique and often comfortable — private rooms with private bathrooms and showers are available, and several reviewers note semi-private rooms that feel effectively private. The facility also offers inpatient physical therapy and an active activities calendar (holiday parties, audiobook sessions, games), which many families cite as enhancing resident quality of life.
Frontline staff — nurses and CNAs — are repeatedly singled out for warmth, attentiveness, and personalized care. A substantial number of reviews say staff know residents by name, treat them like family, and provide genuinely caring hands-on care. Specific staff members are named positively in some accounts. These reviewers emphasize helpfulness, professionalism in direct care, and good therapeutic outcomes (for example, positive inpatient therapy experiences).
However, a contrasting and significant set of complaints centers on management, administration, billing, and communication. Numerous reviewers report that administration is unresponsive, disorganized, or downright rude, with a recurring theme that managerial staff delegate calls, are unavailable, or refuse to communicate with families. Billing complaints are common and detailed: hidden or unclear charges, suspected double billing, missing private-room charges on invoices, billing disputes after a resident’s death, and frustration at a self-pay policy or refusal to accept certain insurance. Several reviewers explicitly advise verifying costs and contractual terms because of these billing inconsistencies.
Beyond administrative concerns, there are serious clinical and safety allegations that cannot be ignored. Multiple reviewers allege neglectful care such as residents being left in bed for extended periods, CNAs doing minimal care, theft of personal items, and poor handling during transfers (dropped or injured residents). More severe claims include pressure ulcers/bedsores progressing to gangrene, hospital readmissions, surgery, and even death that families associate with substandard care. Reports also include unsecured narcotics, equipment problems, and allegations of federal law violations. Infection-control issues are reported as well — with allegations of PPE lapses, COVID-19 spread, quarantine policies that left residents isolated, and at least one report of a resident dying alone. These accounts suggest variability in clinical quality and occasional critical breakdowns in safety and oversight.
A recurring pattern in the reviews is that the quality of a resident’s experience appears to depend heavily on the specific direct-care staff and on the facility’s managerial responsiveness. Many reviewers praise nurses and CNAs yet simultaneously criticize administration, saying the front-line team does its best despite being stretched thin or poorly supported. Several reviews expressly say the staff are caring but understaffed, which helps explain both the positive direct interaction reports and the allegations of neglect or missed care. There are also repeated notes that the facility may have declined since lockdowns, suggesting a temporal deterioration in some families’ experiences.
Taken together, these reviews communicate a facility with strong physical attributes and a cadre of committed direct-care staff, but with notable systemic problems in administration, billing, staffing levels, communication, and—according to multiple accounts—patient safety and clinical outcomes. For prospective residents and families this suggests the need for careful, specific due diligence: confirm staffing levels and shift coverage, get billing and payment policies in writing, document valuables and room inventories, ask about infection-control protocols and transfer procedures, and maintain regular, documented lines of communication with nursing leadership. The mixed but serious nature of some complaints warrants caution; while many report excellent, compassionate care, a meaningful number report dangerous lapses and problematic administration that could materially affect resident wellbeing.
