The reviews present a strongly mixed picture of Good Samaritan Society - Pine River - Inpatient Rehab. On the positive side, multiple reviewers describe a home-like atmosphere and several family members praise individual staff and overall care—using terms such as "phenomenal," "amazing," and "impeccable care." Some long-term residents and their families report satisfaction after multi-year stays (references to 2 and 5 years), and some visitors enjoyed their time visiting loved ones. These positive accounts indicate that the facility can and does provide high-quality, compassionate long-term care for certain residents.
Contrasting sharply with those positive reports are numerous, serious complaints about inconsistent and sometimes dangerous lapses in care. Several reviewers describe staff as unobservant or unresponsive, including incidents where call buttons went unanswered and critical changes in a resident's health were missed. There are specific allegations of failure to contact or involve physicians in a timely manner, repeated health declines, and at least one near-death emergency. These reports uniformly note a need for families to monitor residents daily to avoid preventable deterioration, indicating that, for some residents, the facility is not reliably delivering necessary medical oversight.
Staffing and staff behavior emerge as a central theme driving the divergent experiences. Positive reviews single out helpful, friendly, and compassionate caregivers; negative reviews point to short staffing, uncommunicative employees, and even rude or mean-spirited behavior. The pattern suggests inconsistent staffing levels or uneven staff training/retention — with some shifts or teams providing excellent care while others fall short. Short staffing is explicitly mentioned and is consistent with delayed care and unanswered call buttons that reviewers observed.
Facility and service concerns include complaints about room cleanliness and poor food quality. Several reviewers described rooms that were not kept clean and called the food "horrible." One recurring operational complaint is restrictive cafeteria access, which may affect residents' quality of life and visiting routines. These non-clinical issues, while less immediately life-threatening than missed medical care, contribute to an overall perception of neglect and reduce resident and family satisfaction.
Management and communication are also flagged as problematic. Multiple reviewers report administration that is unresponsive to complaints and a culture where residents or families feel afraid to complain. This perceived lack of accountability compounds the other issues: when serious incidents occur (missed physician contact, emergencies, hygiene problems), families report difficulty obtaining satisfactory explanations or corrective actions from leadership. Where administration and front-line staff are responsive, families report much better experiences, reinforcing that leadership responsiveness is a key differentiator in outcomes and satisfaction.
Overall, the reviews show a facility with significant variability in quality. For some residents, Pine River provides long-term, compassionate, and reliable care; for others, there are dangerous lapses in observation, delayed medical responses, poor housekeeping, and unsatisfactory dining experiences. The most salient patterns are (1) inconsistent care quality linked to staffing and responsiveness, (2) serious safety-related complaints involving missed medical attention and near-emergencies, and (3) administrative unresponsiveness that leaves families feeling they must monitor care themselves. Prospective residents and families should weigh these divergent accounts carefully, ask specific questions about staffing levels and emergency protocols, and consider speaking with current long-term residents or their families to better understand which experiences are more likely to reflect typical care at this facility.
