Overall sentiment across reviews for Great Oaks Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center is highly polarized: a substantial number of reviewers praise the facility for excellent rehabilitation services, compassionate nursing assistants and nurses, cleanliness, and a welcoming environment, while an equally strong subset reports serious lapses in basic care, safety, hygiene, and communication. Many reviewers describe very positive short-term rehab experiences driven by skilled therapists, attentive CNAs, and effective wound care teams leading to successful discharges and recovery. Specific staff members and departments (physical therapy, some nurses/CNAs, dietary, housekeeping, and select administrators) are repeatedly named and commended for going above and beyond, creating a family-oriented and supportive atmosphere for many residents.
However, recurring negative themes point to systemic problems that affect resident safety and dignity. Numerous reviews allege understaffing that translates into long waits for assistance, ignored call lights, delayed medication administration, lack of bathing and toileting help, and situations where families felt compelled to bring food to prevent starvation. Serious clinical outcomes are reported in multiple reviews — dehydration, malnutrition, urinary tract infections, sepsis, pressure ulcers, and acute renal failure — with some cases requiring hospital transfer and even resulting in death. Several reviewers described pressure wounds, severe diaper rash, or raw skin from prolonged soiling, and some reported that injuries or status changes were not promptly communicated to families.
Staffing inconsistency is an important pattern: many reviews contrast caring weekday teams (named individuals receive praise) with inattentive or uncaring weekend or night staff. This variability appears to drive the polarized experiences — when well-staffed and well-supervised, residents receive high-quality therapy and nursing care; when understaffed or on poorly performing shifts, basic needs and safety can be neglected. Complaints also center on professionalism and behavior: reports of mocking residents with dementia, rude or unprofessional employees, and instances of staff discussing residents inappropriately were recorded alongside many reports of compassionate, respectful caregivers.
Facility and amenities are another mixed area. Numerous reviewers commend the building’s cleanliness, updated spaces (therapy gym, ADL suite, movie theater), and friendly decor/staff engagement. Conversely, others reported foul odors (urine and feces), unattended soiling, outdated TVs without remotes, antiquated beds lacking alarms, and personal items left behind or mishandled. Dining feedback is similarly split: some guests praised hot, tasty meals and a caring dietary team, while others described repeated, tasteless meals (notably watered-down soups) and families needing to provide food to their loved ones.
Communication and leadership receive conflicting marks. Several families found administrators responsive, pleasant, and engaged; others report poor leadership, unkept promises, frequent need to repeatedly call about problems, conflicting staff accounts, and even alleged HIPAA violations and improper handling of belongings. Social work issues were cited — for example, follow-up appointments changed without consent — exacerbating families’ distrust. Safety processes also drew criticism: delayed transfers after serious falls, missed X-rays, medication administration without gloves, and reports of medications or treatments not following physician orders.
In summary, reviews indicate that Great Oaks can and does provide excellent rehabilitation, compassionate care, and a clean, supportive environment for many residents — particularly when the right staff and leadership are present. At the same time, a substantial number of reports describe severe lapses in basic care, hygiene, safety, and communication that have had significant medical consequences. Prospective families should weigh these polarized accounts by asking specific, current questions before admission: staffing ratios and weekend coverage, wound care and nutrition protocols, fall/transfer procedures, bedding and alarm availability, how the facility handles communication with families and incident reporting, and recent state survey results. Monitoring during the first days of stay and establishing clear communication lines with therapy, nursing leadership, and administration may help identify whether the resident will experience the facility’s strong rehabilitative side or be exposed to the concerning issues some reviewers describe.
