Overall sentiment: The reviews for Fairview Living Center are highly polarized, with a mix of strong praise for individual staff and community programming alongside serious and repeated allegations of systemic problems. Multiple reviewers describe compassionate caregivers and a clean, home-like environment where residents feel loved and well cared for. At the same time, many reviews report critical safety, regulatory, and ethical concerns that suggest inconsistent quality of care and potential institutional failures.
Care quality and staffing: A dominant theme is unstable and inconsistent care tied to chronic understaffing. Numerous reviews specifically cite inadequate staffing after 5 pm and on weekends and allege that shifts are manipulated to reduce labor costs. Reviewers report overworked CNAs and nurses, missed meals, missed wound or bandage care, delayed call-light responses, and instances where residents were left unattended. Several reviews reference state findings for call-light failures and delayed responses, reinforcing these claims. Conversely, other reviewers describe excellent care, noting many dedicated RNs and teams that collaborate well, indicating that care quality varies substantially by shift, unit, or individual staff.
Safety, documentation, and regulatory concerns: Serious allegations appear repeatedly, including falsified documentation, failure to document negative events, misappropriation of resident funds, denial of services for profit motives, and resident rights violations. Reviewers also report potentially severe safety incidents: sexual misconduct between patients, a resident left in a car in heat and denied wheelchair access, and alcohol provided at events despite explicit restrictions. Several reviews call out patterns serious enough to warrant regulatory attention, including explicit statements that the facility has multiple state findings and recommendations to consider closure. These are grave issues that point to potential systemic failures in oversight and accountability.
Management and administration: Many reviewers criticize leadership as absent, defensive, unresponsive, or unavailable. Complaints include no callbacks, poor communication with families, administration rarely on the floor, and a director perceived as lacking geriatrics expertise. Some reviewers, however, note recent leadership improvements and management that performs rounds and check-ins. This split suggests fluctuating administrative engagement over time or differences across units. There are also allegations of financial abuse and falsified records tied to administration, which elevate concerns beyond day-to-day operational problems to potential legal and ethical violations.
Staff behavior and culture: Reviews repeatedly praise individual employees who demonstrate compassion and exceptional attention, with one staff member named specifically for exemplary care. Therapy and maintenance staff, some supervisors, and a receptionist receive positive mentions. At the same time, reviewers report rude or insulting interactions (including staff insulting family members), favoritism by activities staff, and reports that some caregivers are neglectful or indifferent. This points to a variable culture where individual staff members can be excellent, but cultural or supervisory shortcomings allow poor behavior to persist.
Dining and special needs: Several reviewers note that food is served cold and that the facility does not reliably provide special diets. At least one review mentions alcohol being offered despite restrictions. These concerns affect nutrition, safety, and compliance with care plans especially important for residents with dietary restrictions or medical needs.
Activities and community engagement: Many positive reports describe robust activities, community involvement, and intergenerational programs like trick-or-treat and art projects with children. These programs are a clear strength and contribute to a welcoming atmosphere. However, other reviewers find activities unorganized or biased toward favored residents, indicating inconsistency in programming and staff engagement.
COVID and visitation: COVID-related outbreaks and restrictive visitation policies are cited as sources of distress for families and contributors to reduced oversight. Some reviews describe COVID as rampant at times, affecting both resident care and staff availability, while others note that the facility has recovered and improved since earlier problems.
Conflicting signals and variability: One of the most striking patterns is the degree of contradiction between reviews. Some describe the facility as the best possible place, with outstanding attention and family-like care; others demand it be shut down as unsafe and negligent. This suggests that experiences are highly dependent on timing, specific units or wings, individual caregivers, and possibly changes in management or ownership. The presence of specific allegations (state findings, financial abuse, sexual misconduct) alongside glowing reports of compassion and cleanliness indicates both pockets of real strength and pockets of systemic risk.
Key takeaways: Pros include compassionate and highly committed individual staff, clean and inviting spaces, strong community engagement, and moments of very good clinical staffing and programming. Major cons are serious and recurring: understaffing (especially off-hours), delayed call-light responses, inconsistent care, documentation and financial misconduct allegations, poor leadership visibility and communication, safety incidents, and unresolved regulatory findings. The combination of glowing individual accounts and grave allegations points to an institution with uneven performance and potential systemic issues that merit verification through state inspection reports and direct observation.
Recommendations for readers: Evaluate time- and shift-specific staffing by visiting during evenings and weekends; review the latest state inspection and deficiency reports; ask about policies for documentation, special diets, accompaniment to medical appointments, and how financial transactions are handled; inquire about staff turnover, the qualifications of leadership (including geriatrics training), and how sexual or safety incidents are reported and investigated. Finally, seek references from families who have long-term experience with the facility and observe meal service, call-light response times, and activity programming on a representative sample of days.
