Overall sentiment in these reviews is mixed and polarized. Multiple reviewers consistently praise the facility's physical attributes — the building, interior, and room size are frequently described as beautiful, spacious, and recently updated. Several comments indicate that tours leave a positive impression, and some reviewers explicitly state that care is good or better than other local facilities. Positive staff mentions focus mainly on CNAs and frontline workers described as caring, helpful, and welcoming; a few comments highlight structured training efforts led by individuals named Pam and Jo, which suggests some investment in staff development.
However, alongside those positive impressions are serious and specific negative allegations. Several reviews describe hostile behavior from staff, discriminatory treatment, and accusations of racism. There are direct references to poor treatment of workers and unprofessional behavior from nurses. Operational and care-quality concerns appear as delayed responses to call lights and descriptions of "very poor services" by some reviewers. These complaints point to potential problems with responsiveness, staffing, or staff training at certain times or in certain units.
Management, transparency, and regulatory issues are notable themes. One reviewer observed that the Director of Nursing (DON) is not listed on the company site, which raises transparency concerns for families evaluating leadership and clinical oversight. More seriously, reviewers mention that complaints have been filed with the EEOC and the state Board of Nursing. Those are weighty allegations that suggest either unresolved personnel problems or incidents significant enough to trigger external review. Multiple reviews also state that administration “needs change,” reinforcing the perception among some reviewers that leadership and management practices may be contributing to the facility’s problems.
There is a clear inconsistency in the experience reported: some visitors and families praise the same staff and environment that others criticize harshly. This pattern suggests variability across shifts, units, or staff members rather than uniformly good or bad performance. Positive reports tend to emphasize CNAs and the visible atmosphere (happy residents, welcoming environment), while negative reports single out nurses, administrative responsiveness, and broader organizational or cultural problems (racism, worker mistreatment). The reference to staff training by named individuals indicates that some effort has been made to improve staff skills, but the persistence of complaints about unprofessional behavior and responsiveness suggests training may be uneven or insufficient to address deeper cultural or systemic issues.
For prospective residents and families, these reviews point to important areas to probe further during a visit or before making decisions. Ask for current leadership information (including the DON), staffing ratios, turnover rates, call-light response times, and documentation of how complaints—especially any EEOC or Board of Nursing actions—were handled and resolved. Request to speak with families or residents, observe multiple shifts if possible, and ask for specifics about the training programs (e.g., the roles of Pam and Jo) and how the facility measures and enforces professional behavior among nursing staff. The facility’s strong physical environment and positive reports about CNAs and tours are encouraging, but the serious allegations regarding discrimination, regulatory complaints, and inconsistent care responsiveness warrant careful follow-up and verification before making placement decisions.
