The reviews for The Gardens at Cannon Falls are sharply polarized and reveal two very different experiences: a substantial number of strongly negative accounts describing neglect, safety and hygiene failures, and administrative breakdowns, contrasted with multiple positive reports praising food, certain staff members, cleanliness in parts of the facility, and overall good experiences.
Care quality is the single most contentious theme. Several reviews describe serious neglect — including residents not eating or drinking, dehydration, alleged resulting kidney failure and death, and inadequate documentation of care. There are specific, extreme hygiene-related claims (feces on a bed, toothbrush left in a spit cup beside a razor) and reports that basic care tasks and monitoring were missed. Multiple reports indicate residents were not given proper dining assistance and were left to eat alone in their rooms. These accounts, combined with claims of premature discharge before physician approval and an elder abuse investigation, raise red flags about clinical oversight, safety protocols, and regulatory compliance.
Staffing and staff behavior emerge as another major area of division. A recurring complaint is understaffing and poor responsiveness during shifts; reviewers say staff ignored calls, were dismissive when concerns were raised, and failed to follow through administratively. Contrastingly, numerous reviewers praise individual staff members as kind, courteous, friendly, helpful, and even ‘‘amazing’’. This suggests considerable variability in staff performance across shifts or departments — some caregivers are viewed very positively while others are implicated in neglectful behavior or even theft. Allegations of staff taking residents’ belongings (hearing aids, clothing, blankets, personal photos) and reports of theft increase the severity of concern about personnel practices and supervision.
Facilities and maintenance complaints include nonworking lights, a falling curtain rail, and rooms being dark and cold. Some reviewers reported missing personal items and photos, which compounds worries about both security and respect for residents’ personal property. At the same time, other reviewers noted daily housekeeping and clean bathrooms, indicating that cleanliness and maintenance may be inconsistent across rooms or over time.
Dining receives mixed evaluations. Several reviewers explicitly praise the food — calling it ‘‘very good,’’ noting multiple choices daily, and saying the dining experience is a positive aspect. Conversely, other reports label the food as ‘‘slop’’ or ‘‘bad,’’ and emphasize lack of assistance for those who need help eating. This again points to inconsistent service: the menu and kitchen may produce good meals, but staffing or resident support during meals may be insufficient for some residents’ needs.
Management and administration are critiqued for being dismissive and not following through on concerns. Multiple reviewers described the admissions and office staff negatively, and some said management did not act when problems were raised. The facility is also noted to have undergone multiple name changes, which some reviewers imply may be linked to attempts to rebrand despite ongoing issues.
Overall pattern and recommendation: the reviews reveal a facility with highly inconsistent performance. Positive reports indicate parts of the operation (certain staff, food options, housekeeping) can deliver good experiences. However, the negative reports include serious allegations that affect resident safety — neglect, poor medical oversight, theft, and possible abuse — and point to systemic problems such as understaffing and poor management follow-through. Prospective residents and families should approach with caution: verify current staffing levels, ask for documentation of staffing/incident histories and regulatory inspection results, visit multiple times and at varied hours (including mealtimes and overnight), check how the facility handles personal belongings and documentation of care, and request references from recent families. If safety-critical issues (theft, abuse, neglect) are suspected, contact local regulatory authorities immediately. The mixed reviews indicate the experience here can range from ‘‘great’’ to ‘‘harmful,’’ so careful, up-to-date evaluation is essential before committing.
