Overall sentiment from the collected reviews is strongly negative, with a few mentions that some individual staff members are caring. The dominant themes are poor management, inconsistent and sometimes neglectful care, unsatisfactory living conditions, and administrative problems. Multiple reviewers describe a facility that appears to be very poorly run, with recurrent complaints about management behavior, staff support, and the handling of resident needs.
Care quality and medical concerns are among the most serious issues raised. Several reviews allege that prescribed dietary requirements were not followed—specifically that a diabetic diet was ignored—resulting in high blood glucose readings (reported as 260+ mg/dL) and at least one reported trip to the emergency department. There are also allegations of residents being denied food or denied hospital visits. One review mentions observable physical harm (a bruise on a resident's arm), which, combined with the reported medical neglect, raises significant concerns about resident safety and monitoring.
Staffing and management issues are a recurring pattern. While some staff are described as caring, other staff are called lazy and accused of cutting corners. The House Manager is characterized in strong negative terms by reviewers (described as "horrible"), and staff reportedly feel bullied and unsupported by management. Favoritism toward certain residents and denial of services to others are specifically mentioned. Reviewers also say that disruptive or harassing behavior by residents is tolerated and that management does not adequately correct staff or resident misconduct. These reports suggest problems with leadership, accountability, staff morale, and enforcement of policies.
Facility operations, cleanliness, and daily life receive numerous complaints. Reviewers report poor meals or meals not being provided (dinner withheld), missing or withheld personal items (a TV not returned), and very limited programming or activities (roughly one activity per month). Cleanliness issues are cited—rooms smelling of urine—along with environmental discomfort such as heat kept on year-round. Taken together, these comments describe living conditions that many reviewers find unsanitary, uncomfortable, and lacking in stimulation or meaningful engagement for residents.
There are also mentions of alleged illegal activity and threats to report the facility to authorities. Several people repeat similar allegations, but reviewers frequently provide few verifiable details. The repetition of these claims across multiple reviewers increases the seriousness of the concerns, but the lack of specificity in some summaries limits the ability to independently verify or detail those allegations from the reviews alone.
In summary, the reviews present a pattern of systemic problems: lapses in medical and dietary care, troubling management practices (including alleged abuse of authority, favoritism, and failure to address misconduct), poor cleanliness and living conditions, inadequate meals and activities, and occasional reports of harm or missing property. A small counterpoint in the feedback is that some staff do provide caring attention. However, the balance of comments points to significant operational and care-quality deficiencies that, according to reviewers, warrant closer scrutiny and investigation to verify claims and address the highlighted issues.
