Overall sentiment: The reviews for Medilodge of Westwood are highly polarized but lean heavily toward serious concerns. Across many reviews there are repeated, specific allegations of unsanitary conditions, maintenance failures, medication mistakes, staffing shortages, and communication breakdowns. Interspersed with these negative accounts are multiple reports praising individual staff members, therapy services, activities, and certain aspects of the dining and admissions experience. That pattern—strong praise for people and programs but frequent systemic problems—appears to be the dominant theme.
Care quality and clinical safety: A substantial portion of the reviews describe clinically important failures. Reported issues include medication errors (missing pills, delayed or withheld medications, med bag mix-ups), rehospitalizations for conditions that developed or were not caught during the stay (UTI, sepsis), falls resulting in hospitalization, dehydration reportedly caused by not receiving water, and lack of routine checks. Several reviewers said clinical oversight was lacking, with telehealth cited for therapy and a perceived absence of hands-on medical supervision. There are also multiple accounts of nonfunctional or inaccessible call buttons, no bed rails, and patients left in soiled garments—each of which raises safety and dignity concerns. Together these reports describe a pattern of care lapses that, in multiple cases, resulted in emergency room transfers or worse.
Staffing, responsiveness, and communication: Staffing problems are a frequent and consistent theme. Reviewers report high staff turnover and many new, inexperienced hires alongside a smaller group of praised long-term employees. Many accounts describe being understaffed and having overworked CNAs and nurses, which reviewers link to poor turnaround on calls, missed routines (showers, checks), and rushed care. Communication failures with families and within administration are also common: phone calls going unanswered, front-desk coverage inconsistent, an unresponsive administrator, and poor notification about transfers or changes in patient status. Conversely, when staff do perform well they are described as compassionate, responsive, and able to build strong relationships with residents and families—several reviewers singled out staff by name (Kristi Uribe, Makayla, Ma, Judy) and praised nursing or therapy employees for exceptional care.
Facility condition and maintenance: Multiple reviews describe severe facility maintenance and cleanliness problems: blood-stained bedding, old food left in drawers, holes and chipped paint in walls, crumbling or falling façade, broken toilets and tubs, mold in bathrooms, and broken light fixtures or beds with constant alarms. Some reviewers report that maintenance issues are not addressed on weekends, leaving problems unresolved for extended periods. At the same time, a number of reviews state the facility is clean, well-kept, and quiet—underscoring inconsistent conditions between different units, shifts, or time periods.
Dining and nutrition: Feedback on meals is mixed but leans negative in many accounts. Complaints include cold or unhealthy meals (white bread sandwiches, sugary soups, ice cream in place of balanced nutrition), lack of fresh ingredients, poor portioning, and instances where food quality was perceived as neglectful. However, some reviewers praise the dining area, certain staff (Judy), and specific meals—again indicating uneven performance depending on day, staff, or kitchen situation.
Rehabilitation, activities, and social programming: This is the most consistently positive area in the reviews. Physical and occupational therapy teams receive multiple commendations for effectiveness, friendliness, and helping patients progress or return home. The facility’s therapy gym is noted as large and well-equipped. Activities programming—card games, art projects, hymns, broadcasts and social opportunities—also receives positive mention and contributes to a favorable experience for some families and residents.
Safety, theft, and rights concerns: Several reviews raise serious allegations of theft or loss of personal items (clothing, dentures, wheelchairs, phones), as well as worries about rights violations such as treatment without guardian notification or consent. Incidents of known COVID cases with alleged insufficient precautions (patients in halls without masks) and multiple unreported or poorly handled falls were also cited. These reports combined with clinical lapses amplify safety concerns for prospective residents and families.
Regulatory and oversight signals: Reviewers explicitly reference regulatory scrutiny: the facility’s license (1928040) and that it had nine inspections between April 2021 and February 2024, including two inspections in early 2024. Multiple reviewers recommend prospective residents check the Michigan LARA license and inspection history before admission. The presence of frequent inspections in a relatively short span is consistent with the numerous complaints about safety, cleanliness, and care quality.
Patterns and variability: The most notable pattern is wide variability. Some families report exemplary, compassionate care, strong therapy, clean rooms, and effective communication. Others report the opposite: unsanitary rooms, medication errors, lost items, rehospitalizations, and unresponsiveness. This suggests inconsistent performance across shifts, units, or timeframes—possibly linked to staffing instability, leadership issues, or maintenance resource limitations.
Bottom line and recommended next steps for families: Reviews indicate that the facility has both strong people and programs (therapy and certain staff members) and significant systemic problems (cleanliness, safety, medication management, communication, and maintenance). Prospective residents and families should treat these reviews as a caution to thoroughly vet the facility before admission. Concrete steps include: review the Michigan LARA license and inspection history for license 1928040; request current staffing levels, medication management protocols, and recent maintenance records; tour the specific unit and observe cleanliness and resident conditions at different times of day and on weekends; ask about call-button functionality, bathing schedules, and how personal belongings are accounted for; and verify how the facility handles falls, infections, and family notification. The consistent praise for specific staff and therapy programs suggests there are capable caregivers on site, but the volume and severity of negative reports indicate systemic risks that deserve careful scrutiny before making a placement decision.
