Overall sentiment across the reviews for Complete Care at Heritage is deeply mixed and highly polarized. A substantial subset of reviewers praise the facility for its rehabilitation services, attentive therapists, and several compassionate, hands-on staff members who go above and beyond. Repeated positive themes include excellent PT/OT outcomes, a well-regarded wellness program (frequently credited to Connie/Connie Green), daily therapy and staff who provide family-like support. Several specific staff members are named multiple times for exceptional care (e.g., Laura, Shelly, Candace, Malika, Tika, Kitty), and families often report meaningful functional recovery, coordinated appointments, and successful discharges back to the community. Admissions and sales staff are repeatedly described as professional, responsive, and transparent.
Counterbalancing those positives is a large volume of serious and recurring negative reports describing inconsistent and sometimes unsafe care. Numerous reviewers report neglectful practices such as slow or non-existent responses to call bells, delayed toileting and hygiene (bedpans left, residents not showered for days), missed medications or incorrect medication administration (including delayed insulin and glucose monitoring). There are multiple reports of bedsores, falls, unattended medical declines, and even accounts alleging deaths not noticed for hours. Short staffing and heavy reliance on agency staff are recurring explanations for degraded care; reviewers commonly cite weekend and night shifts as worse and note that agency staff quality varies widely.
Facility condition and infection-control issues appear as a strong theme. While some reviewers note recent improvements (new bathrooms/tiling, carpets replaced after a state inspection) and describe the facility as clean and inviting, many others report alarming problems: persistent urine/feces odors, dirty dining areas and trays, broken furniture, holes in sheets, malfunctioning room phones/remotes, black mold in ventilation, and even Legionella detected in the water system per reviewer claims. These problems are tied to safety concerns and family decisions to supply basic items (sheets, pillows, toiletries) in several cases. There are also reports of privacy invasions (broken bathroom locks) and cramped shared rooms.
Food and dining feedback is split. Some residents praise meals — including specific dishes (shrimp Alfredo, shrimp scampi) — and describe reliable meal service and pleasant dining experiences. Conversely, an equally large contingent labels the food as “disgusting,” too small in portion size, or delivered inaccessibly to bedridden patients. Dining-room cleanliness and tray delivery practices are also inconsistent across reviews.
Staff behavior and management practices are another major axis of divergence. Many frontline caregivers, nurses, and therapists receive heartfelt commendations for kindness, attentiveness, and effective care. However, multiple reviewers report rude, unprofessional, or dishonest behavior from other staff and complain about administrative unresponsiveness: directors and social workers who do not return calls, phone etiquette problems, and an administrative tone described as money-focused or even hostile. There are repeated allegations that management does not adequately address complaints, and several reviewers describe state surveys, health department involvement, or ongoing audits. A number of reviews include severe allegations — ranging from staff or administration lying to families, to purported drugging of residents, to inaction around residents using illicit drugs on the premises — which indicate extreme breakdowns in trust for some families.
Activities and social programming are generally praised when functioning: reviewers commonly note daily activities (bingo, church services), a welcoming atmosphere, and opportunities that help residents feel engaged. The wellness program, in particular, receives strong positive remarks for supporting recovery and long-term change for some residents. Conversely, isolation during COVID quarantine and restricted visitation at times exacerbated feelings of loneliness for others.
Taken together, the reviews suggest a facility with real strengths in rehabilitation, therapy, and pockets of excellent caregiving, but also with significant variability in daily care, safety, infection control, management responsiveness, and cleanliness. The pattern is one of highs and lows: families who experience attentive nurses, strong therapy outcomes, and a supportive wellness program report very positive stays; families who encounter poor shifts, medication errors, hygiene problems, or uninterested management report distressing and potentially dangerous experiences.
For prospective residents and families, the most reliable takeaway is that quality appears highly dependent on specific staff members, shifts, and current management practices. Important due-diligence steps would include asking about infection-control measures and recent state inspection results, clarification on staffing levels and use of agency staff (especially nights/weekends), direct questions about medication administration protocols, and observing cleanliness and meal service during tours. The divided reviews reflect both meaningful strengths to leverage (rehab/therapy and several dedicated caregivers) and serious risks that warrant cautious, hands-on evaluation before placement.
