Overall sentiment across the reviews for Young Home For The Elderly is predominantly positive with repeated emphasis on a small, home-like setting, warm atmosphere, and highly caring staff. Many reviewers highlight that the facility feels like a family home rather than an institution: staff are described as compassionate, attentive, and personally familiar with residents’ preferences and quirks. Multiple comments point to low staff turnover, strong one-on-one attention, emotional support such as comforting gestures, and a manager/director who is present and engaged (one director was praised by name). The small scale (around 20 residents in some accounts) and private-room options, ability to personalize rooms, communal family areas, and a large backyard/gathering spaces contribute to the homelike feel.
Care quality is generally described as good to outstanding in daytime and routine contexts: reviewers report residents being relaxed, well cared for, and respected. Families appreciate proactive communication—regular updates by phone, text, email, and coordinated Zooms—and many cite seamless coordination with hospice and outside medical providers. The dining experience is frequently praised for home-cooked, balanced meals prepared on-site, and reviewers note clean dining spaces and communal family meals. Several mentions of small extras (manicures, entertainment like a saxophonist, planned activities, movie watching) reinforce the feeling of attentive, personalized care.
However, there are some notable and recurring concerns that temper the overwhelmingly positive feedback. A few serious incidents are reported around nighttime care: at least one family recounted an abrupt removal of a resident after a nighttime disruption and described night care as unacceptable. Staffing issues surface in a few reviews—explicit mentions include understaffing and the absence of a registered nurse on staff—which raises questions about the facility’s ability to manage higher-acuity needs. Food service problems were flagged in specific accounts: reports of hair in food, missing meal items, and the cook being unable to explain missing items are concrete complaints that contrast with many positive comments about meals. These issues suggest variability in operational consistency.
Suitability and limits of care are another theme: several reviewers state the facility is an excellent fit for residents requiring basic to moderate assistance who will benefit from a small, family-like environment. Conversely, reviewers repeatedly caution that it is not suitable for residents with more advanced medical or mobility needs (e.g., incontinence or significant mobility impairments). This is reinforced by comments about variable room amenities (some rooms have private bathrooms, others do not), restrictions noted by at least one reviewer (no TV allowed in the room), and the general emphasis on a small, less clinical model of care.
Management and ownership perceptions are mixed. Many reviews compliment the hands-on director/manager and say owners are attentive; others accuse owners of being money-focused or say new owners are problematic. There is also at least one report of poor follow-up from the facility’s admissions/marketing staff. These divergent views on leadership suggest that experiences can vary depending on which staff or owners are involved and underline the importance of confirming current management practices when evaluating the facility.
Activities and resident stimulation receive mixed feedback: some families appreciate planned events, occasional entertainers, and communal activities, while others feel there is a lack of regular, structured cognitive and social programming (comments like “no games, no music” or limited stimulation appear). For prospective residents who need more engagement, this variability is important to note.
In sum, Young Home For The Elderly is consistently praised for its warm, small-scale, family-oriented environment, compassionate staff, cleanliness, reasonable pricing, and strong day-to-day care and communication. The primary concerns to weigh are operational consistency (particularly with food service and night staffing), the absence of an on-site RN or adequate night coverage as reported by some, limited structured activities for stimulation, and suitability limits for higher-acuity residents. These patterns suggest it is a strong option for families seeking an affordable, homelike setting with personalized attention, but prospective families should explicitly confirm current nursing coverage, night staffing practices, food safety protocols, and activity schedules to ensure the facility meets specific medical and engagement needs.
