Overall sentiment is mixed and highly polarized, with a substantial number of reviewers praising the staff, activities, and certain clinical services, while others report serious safety, cleanliness, and care-quality problems. Many families and residents highlight compassionate, professional nursing and caregiving teams who provide comfort, strong communication with families, and a welcoming, home-like environment. Positive comments frequently note competent therapy services, a knowledgeable psychiatric provider, an energetic and creative activities department, helpful social work, and responsive leadership (including DON/ADON and administrators). Several reviews recommend the facility based on good experiences with admissions tours, comfortable rooms that accommodate personal furniture, and practical amenities such as parking and seasonal decorations.
Conversely, a significant portion of the feedback details troubling incidents and chronic issues. There are multiple allegations of mistreatment and neglect ranging from verbal abuse by caregivers to physical mishandling; one review alleges nurses threw a patient's belongings, sprayed a caregiver in the face, and that a patient fell and suffered a broken femur. Other reviewers describe severe neglect, including infrequent showers, unattended incontinence leading to feces and urine in hallways, and trash left around. These accounts indicate inconsistent standards of care and serious lapses in safety and dignity for some residents. Several reviewers explicitly do not recommend the facility due to these concerns.
Cleanliness and housekeeping are recurring themes with large variability: some reviewers report clean, comfortable accommodations initially, while others report dirty floors, persistent urine smell in hallways, and unresponsive housekeeping. Staffing levels are frequently mentioned as an issue—many reviews say the facility is short-staffed, which reviewers link to missed or delayed care (including bathing and therapy). There are also comments that some staff members are unprofessional or verbally abusive, and at least one reviewer described a housekeeping manager yelling at staff. Such behavior contrasts with other accounts praising staff kindness and teamwork, underscoring inconsistent conduct across personnel and shifts.
Dining and food quality draw mixed reactions. Some reviewers praise kitchen staff as helpful, while others describe meals as inedible (overcooked meat, hard Brussels sprouts). Therapy services are generally regarded as competent by several reviewers, but at least one reviewer reported inadequate PT — specifically a lack of in-bed therapy to promote standing and walking — which led to unmet rehabilitation expectations and Ombudsman involvement. Communication with families is another divided area: many reviewers commend constant updates and confidence in staff communication, while others report poor discharge coordination and the need for external advocacy.
Activities and social programming are among the most consistently positive features: multiple reviews call out a creative and active activities team (including a named assistant, Tony), daily programming, and events that contribute to a family-like environment. Leadership and clinical teams (social work, DON/ADON, some administrators) receive praise for being helpful in many cases, yet there are also reports that management and housekeeping need to do more to address cleanliness, staffing, and facility updates.
In summary, Oakland Nursing and Rehabilitation Center elicits strongly divergent experiences. Strengths include compassionate nursing and caregiving in many cases, a strong activities program, helpful social work, competent therapy for many residents, and an environment that can feel home-like and responsive. However, serious and recurring concerns are raised about inconsistent care quality, potential abuse or neglect in isolated but severe instances, short-staffing, housekeeping and sanitation failures, variable food quality, and lapses in therapy and discharge practices. Prospective residents and families should weigh these mixed reports carefully: consider an in-person admissions tour, ask specific questions about staffing ratios, cleaning protocols, recent incident reports, how complaints are handled, and observe dining, therapy, and activities firsthand. For those with complex needs or high vulnerability, it may also be prudent to request references from current families, inquire about recent regulatory/ombudsman actions, and confirm what safeguards and supervision are in place to prevent the serious issues reported by some reviewers.
