Overall impression and sentiment The reviews for Fairlane Senior Care & Rehab Center are highly polarized, with a sizable portion of reviewers describing excellent, compassionate care and another sizable portion reporting serious neglect, safety failures and unprofessional behavior. Positive reviews highlight committed individual caregivers, engaging activities, good food leadership, and management or staff members who respond to family concerns. Negative reviews describe systemic problems — missed medical care, hygiene failures, unsafe practices, theft and staffing shortages — that in some cases led families to remove loved ones from the facility and see measurable improvement elsewhere.
Care quality and clinical concerns A recurring and serious theme is inconsistency in clinical care. Multiple reviewers report missed treatments and plans (including failures on dialysis days), feeding neglect, missed showers and linen changes, pressure sores and skin breakdown, and incidents described as near‑death hospitalizations. Medication management problems are also reported: medications allegedly changed or discontinued without physician visits, misdocumentation, and hazardous items (syringes) left in rooms. Some reviews say doctors and PAs were uninformed about residents’ conditions and that families had to check on loved ones daily. Conversely, other reviewers praise the nurses and doctors and state there was no skin breakdown and excellent clinical oversight — reinforcing that care quality appears to vary widely by unit, shift and individual staff.
Staff behavior and culture Staff behavior descriptions range from “attentive, family-like” and “phenomenal” to “rude, lazy and unprofessional.” Positive accounts single out specific staff members (for example, Ms. Etta Brown), and note a cohesive team, quick responsiveness and dignity afforded to residents. Negative accounts describe ignored call lights, CNAs on phones, yelling at patients, dismissive attitudes toward families, loss or theft of resident property (including money and dentures), and even reported incidents of disrespect toward a blind resident and alleged racist insults. The divide suggests real variability in staff compassion and professionalism that may depend on which caregivers are on duty.
Facilities, housekeeping and safety Facility-related complaints are numerous and significant: reports of dirty rooms, insects or bugs in drinks, food left out unrefrigerated, toilets leaking or clogged, rooms not cleaned, and syringes left in rooms. The physical layout is noted as large rooms but often with three residents per room and no in-room bathrooms, which several families found unacceptable. Some reviewers praise the facility as clean, organized and secure with well-planned parking and access procedures. Again, experiences vary: some units or visits seemed well-maintained while others were described as unsanitary and unsafe.
Dining and activities Dining experiences are mixed. Several reviewers report undercooked or missed meals, rude dining staff, and food safety lapses (dairy left out). At the same time, the food service director and some dining staff receive praise, and other families commend nutritious meals, holiday meals and active food programming. Activities receive predominantly positive comments: DJs and live music, Sunday worship services, and structured programs (Matika-led activities) that keep residents engaged. These activity offerings are repeatedly cited by families who had positive experiences.
Management, operations and communication Reviewers report both supportive and dysfunctional management. Positive comments mention admitting staff and management that were responsive to concerns, resolved issues, and created an environment of care. Negative comments point to disorganization, missing discharge paperwork, poor communication with families (including extended periods without physician contact), leadership problems, inconsistent hours, and alleged misdirection by social work staff. Several reviewers explicitly advise that leadership needs to “clean house,” and some allege administrative malfeasance or misrepresentation (for example, staged photos). There are also references to regulatory scrutiny — state investigations and lawsuits — which underline the severity of some complaints.
Safety, legal and ethical concerns A number of reviews make very serious allegations: theft of resident property or money, financial exploitation, medication and clinical mismanagement, unattended seizures, severe neglect resulting in hospitalizations, and state involvement. These allegations, if accurate, point to systemic risks to resident safety and dignity. Some reviewers assert that state oversight is needed; others describe moving residents out and seeing clear improvement, which further suggests that problems were significant enough to cause harm.
Patterns and interpretation The dominant pattern across the reviews is high variability. Positive and negative reports often coexist in the same dataset; many families report excellent care and staff, while others experienced neglect and safety problems. This suggests that the facility’s performance may be highly unit‑ or shift‑dependent, or that recent management/staffing changes have produced fluctuating quality. Several reviewers describe an initial good experience that later deteriorated, which could indicate turnover, short‑staffing, or management instability.
Practical takeaways for families Given the breadth and severity of negative reports alongside strongly positive accounts, prospective families should approach Fairlane with caution and thorough due diligence. Recommended steps include: touring the specific unit they are considering (including a meal and activity observation), asking for current staffing ratios and recent incident/complaint history, requesting copies of recent state inspection or complaint reports, asking how medications and physician orders are managed, checking references with other families currently in the same unit, and confirming procedures for handling valuables and discharge paperwork. If a loved one is already at Fairlane, families should monitor closely in the first weeks, document any missed care or safety issues, escalate promptly to management and the state if warranted, and be prepared to transfer if repeated failures occur.
Bottom line Fairlane Senior Care & Rehab Center elicits strongly conflicting reviews: it can provide excellent, engaged, family‑style care and activities under certain staff and management conditions, but multiple reviewers cite profound lapses in safety, hygiene, clinical care and professionalism that have led to hospitalization, alleged theft, and regulatory attention. The overall picture is one of inconsistent care quality with potential risk — careful, unit-specific evaluation and ongoing oversight by families are strongly advised before placing a loved one there.
