Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized but leans strongly negative. Many reviewers describe systemic problems with care quality, safety, communication, and facility maintenance, while a subset of families and patients praise specific staff members, particularly in admissions and physical therapy. The most consistent positive themes are focused and repeated praise for certain teams (PT, some nurses, and particular admissions staff), some clean/well-lit areas, and a few instances of compassionate, patient-centered care (including end-of-life support). However, these positives are often framed as exceptions rather than the rule, with many families reporting that good experiences depended heavily on which staff members were on duty and that care quality varied significantly between stays or shifts.
Care quality and clinical concerns are among the most frequent issues. Numerous reviews report neglectful practices such as delayed medication administration, inappropriate use of diapers instead of assisting residents to the bathroom, leaving residents in feces, and failure to provide basic hygiene and foot/toe care. There are multiple reports of medication errors and delays (one example noted delays over 90 minutes), and allegations that medical appointments were missed because transport was poorly coordinated. Several reviewers described incidents that created direct safety risks: falls with delayed response, unsafe equipment (sinking or non-functioning hospital beds, wheelchairs that didn’t work), and at least one report of skin injury caused by overly tight ankle monitoring equipment. These accounts suggest staffing and training shortfalls that compromise clinical and physical safety.
Staff behavior and communication are another major theme. Reviews repeatedly describe rude, dismissive, or even hostile staff; shouting and threats; and managers who were unhelpful or obstructive. Families frequently complained that calls and emails were not returned, social workers were hard to reach, and records/administrative departments were unresponsive. Conversely, multiple reviews singled out particular employees (front desk staff, specific admissions directors, nurse supervisors, and the PT team) as professional, kind, and effective. This pattern points to inconsistent staffing performance — pockets of commendable staff and teams exist, but reliability is uneven and quality depends heavily on who is on duty.
Facility condition, accessibility, and maintenance issues appear repeatedly. Many reviewers noted that the building is older and in need of renovation: broken toilets and bathrooms, dirty mattresses, worn sheets, nonworking lights, faulty bed mechanics, narrow doorways and stairs that impede wheelchair access, and pest/gnat issues. Several residents were reportedly moved into rooms that did not match promises (private rooms promised but shared rooms delivered), and there are accounts of nonworking bathrooms forcing families to supply linens, bedpans, or even meals. Fire safety concerns and general run-down conditions were raised by multiple reviewers, contributing to a perception that the facility is not adequately maintained.
Food and activities receive mixed to poor feedback. Many reviewers characterized the dining as poor quality — cold, overly salty, inconsistent, or wasted — and said dietary needs were not reliably met. A smaller number appreciated conveniences such as in-room Netflix and the ability to order DoorDash. Activities were not a frequent focus in the reviews provided, so no consistent strength in programming is evident beyond occasional mentions of holiday decorations and cheery common areas.
Administrative, billing, and legal issues are recurring and significant. Several families reported disputes over deposits, unclear billing, withheld refunds, and engagement with the Better Business Bureau. There are also reports of restricted access to resident funds or stimulus checks being held, and at least one allegation that clothing was stolen. Discharge planning and transitions are a major weak point: poor coordination, last-minute or unsafe discharges, refusal to discharge to family, and missing or questionable discharge documentation were repeatedly cited. Some reviewers explicitly referenced considering or initiating legal action due to these administrative failures.
Safety, ethics, and infection control concerns appear in multiple reviews. COVID-related visitation policies and infection risk were mentioned as problematic by some families. Allegations of abusive or discriminatory behavior, racial slurs, and ethical lapses (including threats to call police rather than resolve family concerns) appear in the most severe negative reports. These accounts, coupled with examples of neglect and delayed response to emergencies, suggest both cultural and operational problems that could have legal and regulatory implications.
A strong pattern throughout the reviews is inconsistency: the facility can provide excellent, compassionate care in some cases (notably PT and certain nursing staff), but multiple reports indicate that acceptance of admission does not guarantee a uniform standard of service. Families often reported needing to advocate aggressively or even be present to ensure acceptable care. The gap between positive anecdotal experiences and numerous detailed complaints indicates variability in staffing, management follow-through, and operational reliability.
Recommendations based on the themes in these reviews: prioritize staffing stability and training (to address neglect, medication timing, and emergency responsiveness); improve maintenance and accessibility (repair beds, toilets, ensure wheelchair access, address pest and odor issues); overhaul discharge planning and transport coordination (clear protocols, accountable case managers); strengthen billing transparency and refund processes; and address cultural and communication issues at management level (responsive leadership, consistent customer service, and documented complaint resolution). Families deciding on placement should seek specific, documented assurances about room assignment, staffing levels, discharge processes, and billing practices; and when possible, meet or communicate with the PT team and specific nurses who have been praised to determine likelihood of consistent care.
In short, while South River Healthcare Center has pockets of commendable staff and services (notably PT and select admissions and nursing personnel), the volume and severity of complaints about neglect, safety, communication, facility condition, and administrative failures indicate significant, systemic concerns. Prospective residents and families should weigh the positive testimonials about particular teams against widespread reports of inconsistent and sometimes dangerous care practices, and should demand clear, written assurances and oversight before placement.
