Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans toward positive personal experiences tempered by several serious operational and communication concerns. Many reviewers emphasize that staff members are kind, caring and engaged; multiple comments call out an "amazing experience" and praise the caregiving and management teams as thorough and compassionate. The facility's smaller size and clean environment are repeatedly noted as strengths, with a layout (rooms along a hallway) described as suitable for resident needs. Reviewers also appreciate the social side of the community: scheduled activities are run well, a new activities director is in place, and there is a genuine sense of community and relief for families who feel supported. Several reviewers specifically mention strong support for residents with MS and that staff adapt to individual needs, which contributes to recommendations and overall satisfaction for some families.
However, a consistent theme is variability in care quality tied to individual staff members and high employee turnover. Multiple reviews state that care "depends on the individual," meaning some shifts or staff provide excellent service while others fall short. This inconsistency is a major driver of mixed impressions. Operationally serious issues were raised around medication administration adherence and pendant/alert systems: reviewers report adherence concerns and instances where nurses turned off phones, causing communication failures. These issues raise safety concerns, particularly for residents who rely on monitored medication schedules or emergency pendant alerts.
Communication and policy problems are another significant cluster of negative feedback. Reviewers reported poor communication about resident deaths and uncertainty around hospice eligibility and processes. One or more reviews describe abrupt, distressing administrative actions: a forced 5-day move-out notice, residents' belongings placed in storage, inability to transport residents to appointments, and additional unplanned costs that created financial burdens for families. These incidents point to systemic problems with discharge/relocation policies, transitions of care, and family communication that can outweigh the positive interpersonal experiences when they occur.
Care scope and clinical capability concerns appear in several summaries. Some reviewers say the facility promised to manage high-risk fall risks and diabetic needs but failed to deliver; combined with the medication and communication issues, these reports suggest the community may be less reliable for residents with complex medical needs. The inability to provide transportation to appointments further limits the center's practicality for families who expect on-site coordination of routine medical visits. While some staff and management receive praise, these operational gaps create significant risks for residents who require consistent clinical oversight.
Activities and social programming are generally strengths. The presence of a new activities director and comments that activities are "done well" indicate that the social and recreational aspects of the community are functioning and positively affect resident well-being. The facility's smaller size and described sense of community align with reviewers feeling relieved and blessed by the environment, reinforcing that for many residents the daily living and social environment is very supportive.
In summary, Suite Living Senior Care of Ramsey appears to offer a warm, clean, and community-oriented environment with an engaged caregiving team and solid activity programming. These strengths contribute to many positive, sometimes glowing, personal experiences. At the same time, repeated and serious concerns about clinical consistency, medication administration, alert/communication reliability, administrative transparency (including handling of moves and possessions), and failures to meet promised higher-acuity needs create risk and anxiety for families. Prospective residents and families should weigh the positive interpersonal and social environment against the operational and clinical concerns. For those considering the facility, recommended next steps would be: (1) ask for written policies on medication administration, pendant/alert handling and staff response times; (2) clarify procedures for hospice, high-acuity needs, and transportation to appointments; (3) request documentation of turnover rates and staffing consistency on intended shifts; and (4) get clear, written terms about move-out notice requirements, storage of belongings, and potential extra costs. These targeted questions can help determine whether the community's strengths align with an individual resident's medical and care-safety needs.
