Overall sentiment in these reviews is highly mixed with stark contrasts: many reviewers praise the facility itself, certain staff members, and the recreation and therapy programs, while a substantial number of reviews report serious care, safety, and operational problems. The pattern that emerges is one of wide variability in resident experience. When things go well, reviewers describe a clean, modern facility with compassionate, professional caregivers and very good recreational and therapy offerings. When things go poorly, complaints center on basic neglect, inconsistent staffing, poor food, maintenance failures, and safety or ethical issues.
Care quality and clinical concerns are among the most serious recurring themes. Multiple reviewers describe neglect of basic personal care tasks (missed baths, not brushing teeth) and failures to turn immobile residents, which families link to the development of pressure sores. There are direct reports of wound care neglect including dressings not being changed and stool found in dressings. Call bells ignored for extended periods, delayed medication administration, and periods with no professional staff on a floor were reported as frequent and dangerous problems. Several reviews allege a decline in quality after an ownership change, and some describe a situation where supervisors are not routinely checking units and staff are overwhelmed or undertrained. There are also reports of residents' health declining under care, hospice transitions, and at least one account of a resident passing away with family attributing decline to facility neglect.
Staffing and staff behavior show strong polarization in reviewer accounts. Numerous reports commend individual employees—especially the recreation director (many praise Mone), specific therapists (including an occupational therapist named Betsy), and some CNAs and nurses who provided attentive care. These accounts describe person-centered programming, engaging activities, and helpful, compassionate clinicians. Conversely, many reviews describe chronic understaffing, rude or unprofessional nursing staff, CNAs needing more training, supervisors not providing oversight, and staff who are unhelpful or indifferent. Serious allegations appear in several reviews including intimidation of family members, privacy breaches (video of a resident in therapy), alleged staff theft of belongings necessitating police involvement, and claims of fraudulent billing or a billing-focused administration. Reports of overprescription or misuse of opioids and potential medication misuse exacerbate the safety concerns raised by families.
Facility, maintenance, and environment feedback is also mixed. A number of reviewers describe the facility as clean, modern, and well-appointed with attractive decor, private rooms, pleasant views, and good outdoor spaces. Others describe significant maintenance and cleanliness problems: urine or sewage-like odors on certain floors, old or ruined furniture and carpeting, broken toilets, showers without grab handles, broken beds and mattresses causing pain, and trays left in rooms. There are operational complaints about building access and reception coverage—some reviewers note a strong front-desk impression while others report no receptionist after 3pm, doors and bell systems that do not function reliably, and restrictions or confusion about visitor entry, particularly on weekends or evenings. These inconsistencies suggest uneven upkeep and variable staffing or policies by shift.
Dining and nutrition receive contradictory comments. A portion of reviewers describe nutritious, varied meals, three meals a day, and diet-sensitive meal planning. However, a large and repeated theme is poor food quality: descriptions of processed, terrible-tasting food, diet noncompliance, missing or lost trays, no offering of supplements, and general dissatisfaction with meal preparation. Given that nutrition is a key element of care for many long-term residents, the frequency of negative comments here is notable.
Activities and therapy are among the facility’s most consistently praised components when staff are present and engaged. The recreation program is described as high energy, person-centered, and varied, contributing to residents having good days and improved quality of life. Several reviewers highlight effective physical and occupational therapy staff who contributed to rehabilitation success. Still, some families report insufficient therapy services or a lack of rehab intensity at times, reinforcing the overall theme of inconsistent service delivery.
Management, communication, and policy issues appear repeatedly. Families report poor communication from management, social workers, and HR, difficulty coordinating with doctors, denial of discharge requests in at least one case, and general opacity around billing and administrative decisions. Numerous reviews tie declines in care quality to ownership or management changes. After-hours policies and staffing shortfalls are a common source of concern, with multiple reviewers stating that professional staff are not present during certain shifts and that response times or service levels drop dramatically in evenings and weekends.
Taken together, the reviews portray a facility capable of providing high-quality, compassionate, rehab-focused care when fully staffed and when specific staff are present and engaged. However, significant and repeated operational problems—chronic understaffing, inconsistent supervision, hygiene and wound-care lapses, maintenance failures, food quality complaints, communication breakdowns, and serious allegations regarding theft and medication practices—introduce substantial risk and distress for families and residents. The most consistent recommendation implied by these reviews is that leadership must address staffing ratios and training, strengthen supervisory oversight and after-hours coverage, improve maintenance and food service, and urgently investigate and remedy any reported safety, privacy, or billing issues. Until such systemic problems are resolved, experiences at the facility are likely to remain highly inconsistent and polarized between positive pockets of excellent care and serious lapses that endanger resident wellbeing.
