Overall sentiment across reviews for Cherry Hill Nursing and Rehabilitation is highly polarized, with some families describing excellent, compassionate care and others reporting serious neglect, safety incidents, and administrative failures. The facility receives praise for individual staff members, social workers, and certain departments (notably admissions and specific nurses/aides), but also receives very strong criticism for inconsistent staffing, communication breakdowns, and multiple reports of unsafe care.
Care quality: Reviews demonstrate a wide range of care experiences. Many reviewers highlight skilled, caring nurses and aides who treated residents with dignity, and successful rehabilitation outcomes driven by PT/OT staff. Specific employees (Cheryl, Ginger, Steve and others) are called out for going above and beyond. Conversely, a substantial number of reviews describe neglectful care: residents left in soiled garments for hours, failure to assist with toileting, bathing or changing, falls resulting in rehospitalization, and delayed or incorrect medication administration. There are multiple mentions of medication charting issues, overmedication, and nurse documentation missing from charts. These safety-related complaints are among the most serious themes and include at least one account referencing police involvement and an ongoing investigation.
Staffing and shifts: A frequent and consistent pattern is variability by shift and individual employee. Daytime and admissions staff are often described as friendly and organized, whereas evening/night shifts and weekends are repeatedly criticized for being short-staffed, slow to respond, and inattentive (including reports of staff on cell phones while providing care). Short staffing is linked to long call-light response times, missed care, and increased risk of residents being unattended. Several reviews attribute problems to staffing shortages rather than individual malice, while others describe unprofessional or abusive behavior by certain employees.
Management, communication, and administration: Many reviewers report poor communication and ineffective management. Complaints include delayed or missing vaccination/medical record updates, unresponsive or unavailable administrators, failure to notify families promptly about adverse events or deaths, difficulty obtaining corporate contact, and inconsistent follow-through on assurances made by staff. Some families praised the director of nursing and admissions team as being professional and helpful, but others described unhelpful social workers, rude front desk staff, and an administration perceived as money-driven or dismissive. There are also allegations of theft of personal items and privacy/HIPAA breaches, which point to lapses in administration and oversight.
Facility, cleanliness, and dining: Accounts of the physical environment and dining are mixed. Several reviewers describe the facility as clean, home-like, odor-free, and well-maintained, with decent-sized rooms and ongoing remodeling. Others report foul odors in hallways, spoiled food, and poor handling of dietary needs (notably diabetic accommodations). Meals are often described as having multiple choices and acceptable quality by some families, while others found the food spoiled or inadequate. Laundry and personal belongings management is another recurring issue, with several reports of lost or swapped clothing and theft.
Activities and social engagement: Activity programming is repeatedly cited as a strength. Reviews mention a variety of offerings—game days, sing-alongs, bingo, movies, cards, outings (including a much-loved baseball game outing), church services, and pastoral visits. Activity staff and social workers are praised for engaging residents, organizing trips, and contributing to a family-like atmosphere. For many residents, activities and the social environment are among the most positive aspects of their stay.
Safety, incidents, and legal concerns: There are multiple reports of serious safety incidents: falls that led to hospital readmissions, allegations of elder abuse, a reported resident death with conflicting statements and police involvement, and claims of overmedication or medication delays. These incidents raise significant red flags about clinical oversight and resident safety. Several reviewers explicitly advise against sending loved ones to the facility, while an equal number strongly recommend it — underscoring the inconsistency and the high stakes involved.
Net impression and patterns: The reviews indicate a facility that can deliver high-quality, compassionate care in many cases—particularly when staffed by attentive, well-trained individuals and when residents engage in activities and rehabilitation. However, persistent problems with staffing levels, management responsiveness, documentation, and safety create a substantial risk of poor outcomes for some residents. The most actionable themes for improvement are increased and more consistent staffing (especially nights and weekends), stronger management oversight and accountability, improved communication and recordkeeping, stricter controls on personal property, and a focus on basic caregiving tasks (toileting, bathing, timely medication administration).
Recommendation summary: Prospective families should consider Cherry Hill's capacity for good rehabilitative and social programming and the presence of dedicated staff members. At the same time, they should weigh the recurring reports of neglect, communication failures, and staffing shortages. When evaluating this facility, ask specifically about staffing ratios by shift, incident reporting and investigation procedures, medication administration and documentation practices, laundry and valuables policies, and recent inspection or investigation results. Visiting during different shifts and seeking references from current families can help determine whether the unit or staff likely to care for a loved one align with the positive or negative patterns reported in these reviews.
