Overall sentiment in these reviews is highly mixed with a pronounced divide between praise for individual staff members and serious concerns about systemic care issues. Many reviewers highlight compassionate, hardworking caregivers and nurses who know residents personally, provide hands-on support, and facilitate meaningful rehabilitation progress (including 90-day rehab stays). Positive comments describe a pleasant environment in parts of the building—clean areas, a beautiful porch, an active activities calendar, and the ability for residents to personalize rooms. Some families explicitly state that the staff went "above and beyond," that the facility is "closer to home," and that certain shifts and employees provide excellent, attentive care.
However, a substantial portion of reviews report significant and recurring problems that point to systemic shortcomings. The most frequent themes are understaffing and poor responsiveness: call lights left unanswered for long periods (an hour or more in some accounts), slow assistance with transfers, and long waits for pain medication. Reviewers describe night shifts as notably worse than day shifts, with CNAs taking an hour to answer call lights and family members needing to step in to help. Multiple accounts describe inadequate personal hygiene care—residents not being showered or bathed—and resulting skin breakdowns, including bedsores. These are serious care-quality concerns that several reviewers link to rushed or insufficient staffing.
Sanitation and facility condition are described inconsistently: while some reviewers call the facility clean and well-kept, others report strong unpleasant smells, "disgustingly dirty" areas, and a rundown appearance. Laundry problems (lost clothing) and outdated equipment are recurring complaints. Reviewers also note the facility's limitations in providing higher-acuity care—statements say staff were unable to accommodate tracheostomy or feeding-tube care and that coordination with dietary or the cafeteria was poor for residents needing dialysis or special feeding schedules. Food quality is criticized, with specific mention that diabetic residents did not receive proper diabetic trays or meals.
Communication and management issues appear repeatedly. Families report difficulty reaching staff by phone (voicemail full, unresponsive lines), repeated calls to charge nurses, and poor coordination across departments. Several reviews use strong language about management being "horrible" or unfair to residents and staff. There are also alarming claims of improper medical decisions made without consent, development of pressure injuries while under care, and at least one review linking poor care to a resident death. Some reviewers indicate they filed or planned to file complaints with the state health department, Medicaid, and the attorney general, suggesting the issues experienced were severe enough to pursue external oversight.
Taken together, the pattern is one of inconsistent care quality: attentive, compassionate care can be found, particularly on some day shifts and with certain individuals, but there are multiple, serious reports of neglect, poor hygiene, delayed responses, sanitation problems, and management breakdowns that suggest systemic staffing and administrative issues. Prospective residents and families should weigh both the positive reports about individual staff and the serious negative allegations. Practical next steps for families considering this facility would be to visit multiple times (including evenings/nights and weekends), ask for recent state inspection reports and staffing ratios, inquire specifically about wound care, bathing schedules, diabetic meal accommodations, laundry procedures, and the facility’s ability to manage higher-acuity needs (tracheostomy/feeding tubes/dialysis coordination). Checking for any regulatory actions or complaints filed with the state health department or Medicaid would also be prudent given the reviews that mention escalated complaints.
