Overall sentiment across the reviews for Manor Care Health Services - Largo is strongly mixed, with a clear split between consistently praised clinical/therapy staff and recurring, serious concerns about facility conditions, staffing, and safety. Many reviewers single out the rehabilitation program (physical and occupational therapy) as a major strength: therapists and therapy teams — frequently named — are credited with measurable progress, motivation, and successful discharges. Admissions and concierge staff also receive repeated positive mention (names like Michelle, Julia, and Dria), as do certain GNAs and maintenance personnel. For many families and short-term rehab patients the facility delivered effective therapy, personable interactions, and a smooth transition home.
However, alongside these positives there are pervasive and often severe complaints. Cleanliness and sanitation emerge repeatedly: reports describe persistent urine and fecal odors, stained linens and gowns, flies, and even rodent concerns. Several reviewers differentiate between renovated, well-kept areas (often noted as first-floor or recent updates) and older, neglected sections of the building. This uneven upkeep contributes to a sense of an aging facility in partial disrepair. Multiple accounts describe rooms and bathrooms not being cleaned, missing or soiled pillowcases, and supplies such as washcloths, towels, and diapers being in short supply.
Staffing and responsiveness are recurring problem themes. Numerous reviewers say call bells go unanswered for long periods, especially during nights and after-hours, and that residents were left in soiled conditions or not repositioned. While some individual nurses and CNAs are praised for compassion and attentiveness, other staff are described as rude, inattentive, or inexperienced. Several reviews report clinical lapses — delayed medication administration, wrong medications, and in at least one instance alleged forged signatures on therapy paperwork — which point to inconsistent medication management and documentation practices. There are also concerning allegations of neglect, rough handling, theft of personal items, and even alleged assault; a few reviewers request regulatory action or closure of the facility.
Infection control and safety concerns appear in multiple summaries. Reviewers cite COVID/quarantine protocols that seem inadequate (e.g., unmasked patients roaming), rehospitalizations for pneumonia/UTIs after discharge, and other post-discharge complications. Specific clinical care failures are reported: ostomy care lapses with leaking bags, wound care and early-stage bedsores, delayed ostomy or feeding tube responses, and alleged instances where acuity or fever were not monitored or escalated promptly. A small number of reviews reference severe outcomes including wrongful death litigation and a large monetary award, which underscores the potential seriousness of systemic issues described by families.
Administrative communication and care coordination also present mixed impressions. Some families report proactive administrators who follow up and resolve issues, and social workers who are professional and helpful. Others describe unresponsive management, social workers who do not return calls or are unhelpful, transfer and discharge paperwork problems, and difficulty reaching corporate offices. Transportation logistics were at times problematic but also resolved for some, where a second carrier performed well. Complaints about food quality and temperature are frequent: many reviewers describe meals as cold, burnt, or unappetizing, while others report good dietary experiences.
Activities and resident life show another dual pattern: the Activities Department and certain directors are repeatedly praised for meaningful programs, social opportunities, and efforts to engage residents (movie nights, popcorn, comprehensive programming). Yet some reviewers report little social interaction, limited outside time, poorly positioned TVs, and cramped rooms, leading to depression or low morale for certain residents.
In summary, Manor Care Largo demonstrates pockets of high-quality, compassionate care — especially in therapy and among several named staff — but significant and recurring deficiencies in facility maintenance, cleanliness, staffing levels, responsiveness, medication/documentation practices, and safety protocols. The reviews indicate a divergence in experience often tied to which floor/unit and which staff are on duty. For prospective residents and families this suggests careful, specific inquiry before placement: visit multiple units and shifts, ask about staffing ratios, infection-control protocols, recent inspection or litigation history, how adverse events are handled, and whether specific therapists or aides you prefer will be assigned. The facility’s strengths in rehabilitation and several standout staff members are real assets, but the consistent reports of neglect, sanitation issues, and serious safety concerns mean families should exercise caution, monitor care closely if they choose this facility, and escalate promptly if standards slip.
