Overall impression: Reviews of Lemoyne Place are mixed, with strong praise for the people who provide day-to-day care and serious concerns about facility cleanliness, maintenance, and emergency response. Multiple summaries highlight an efficient and conscientious manager and a committed caregiving staff, while at least one review describes unsafe conditions and a problematic response to a medical emergency. The combination of these contrasting themes suggests that families may experience very different aspects of the community depending on what matters most to them—relationship-based care and administrative help, or physical upkeep and safety protocols.
Care quality and staff: The dominant positive signals relate to staff behavior and the personal side of care. Reviewers repeatedly describe the manager as professional, conscientious, and efficient, noting practical assistance such as help with Medicare paperwork that saves time for families. Several comments emphasize a loving, family-centered environment and committed staff; one reviewer specifically said a father-in-law is happy and well cared for. These points indicate strong interpersonal care, good communication on administrative matters, and an overall perception of high-quality caregiving among some residents and families.
Facilities, safety, and maintenance: In contrast, a very serious set of negatives focuses on the physical condition of the facility and safety protocols. One review calls the facility "filthy" and reports damaged flooring that creates trip hazards. That same account describes a delayed hospital transfer after a concerning incident, with the nurse acknowledging the need for hospital care but an owner allegedly more focused on lunch, which culminated in an ER visit and raised the risk of a subdural hematoma. These are acute, high-risk concerns: poor cleanliness and flooring maintenance create ongoing safety risks, and delays or apparent misprioritization during a medical emergency indicate potential gaps in protocols, staffing accountability, or leadership response.
Management and operational patterns: The reviews present a split picture of management. On the one hand, the manager is singled out positively for professionalism and helpfulness; on the other hand, an owner is accused of inappropriate priorities during an emergency. This contrast suggests inconsistent operational leadership or variability across shifts, personnel, or parts of the organization. The positive reports about administrative help (e.g., Medicare paperwork) and value-for-money indicate that some administrative functions are handled well, while infrastructure upkeep and emergency decision-making may be weaker points.
Dining, activities, and gaps in information: Aside from an anecdote implying a management focus on lunch at an inopportune moment, reviewers do not provide substantive details about dining quality, activity programming, social opportunities, or other lifestyle services. The absence of commentary on activities and meals means there is insufficient evidence in these summaries to evaluate those aspects; what is clear is that aspects tied to resident well‑being beyond direct caregiving—cleanliness, flooring, emergency triage—are a liability.
Net assessment and implications: In sum, Lemoyne Place appears to deliver strong, compassionate interpersonal care and helpful administrative support in many respects, and some families feel the cost and quality balance is fair. However, significant and specific safety and cleanliness complaints—especially a reported delayed hospital transfer and hazardous flooring—are serious red flags that could outweigh the positives for prospective residents and families prioritizing safety and facility condition. The reviews point to a need for the community to address maintenance, cleanliness, and emergency-response consistency to align the positive staff culture with reliable, safe operations.
