Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but leans heavily toward concerns about consistency of care, staffing, and management communication. Positive comments focus on the social and therapeutic aspects: many reviewers praise the activities program, social dining, in-house physical therapy, and in several cases the food and friendly atmosphere. Some staff members—particularly long-tenured employees—are described as attentive, knowledgeable, and caring, and reviewers explicitly credit quick telephone responsiveness and phone connectivity with improving quality of life for some residents. A portion of reviewers also regard the facility as a good value and appreciate security and a generally clean environment.
However, a substantial number of reviews report serious and repeated problems with responsiveness and clinical care. The most significant pattern is slow assistance and ignored call buttons, with families describing long delays for help and residents being left alone after meals or asleep in wheelchairs. Multiple reports raise concerns about dementia and memory-care: roommates who are not suitable for memory-care residents, staff who are “unable” to care for dementia patients, and situations that caused confusion and agitation. One reviewer explicitly said the facility kicked a resident out after a few days and that dementia care was inadequate. Medication management and clinical coordination are frequent trouble points: reviewers cite medication coordination problems, delayed medication refunds, and worries about insulin administration performed by LPN med techs. There is at least one serious report of delayed infection treatment resulting in a C. diff infection, dehydration, weakness, and hospital readmission, which underscores potential risks around clinical oversight and infection control.
Staffing and management variations appear to drive much of the inconsistent experience. Several reviews contrast long-tenured, knowledgeable staff and positive personal interactions with accounts of rude or uneducated staff, a decline in service after a management change, and unhappy employees. This suggests that quality varies by shift, team, or period and that leadership changes have impacted care delivery. Communication from management is another divided theme: while some families praise quick telephone responses and proactive communication, others report no callbacks from management, failure to notify about meals, delayed refunds for rent and meds, and vaccine access delays that lasted months. These administrative failures contribute to distrust and frustration among families.
Facility and dining feedback is also mixed. Positive notes include social meals and a variety of menu options, while negatives include meals described as heavy on pork with too few fresh vegetables and specific concerns about missed or delayed meals. Room-level issues include cleanliness concerns, an older building aesthetic, and the lack of private/single rooms—multiple reviewers noted only shared rooms are available and that the facility may not support long-term residency needs for some families. Security was called out positively in some reviews, but safety-related operational problems (residents left unsupervised, ignored call buttons, discharge after short stays) present clear risk points.
In summary, the collection of reviews paints a picture of a facility that can offer strong social programming, friendly relationships with some staff members, and practical services (therapy, activities), but that also demonstrates inconsistent clinical care, problematic communication, and operational lapses. Positive experiences often highlight specific staff members or teams and good phone responsiveness; negative experiences cluster around dementia care failures, medication and infection management, missed meals, ignored call bells, staffing shortages, and administrative delays (refunds, vaccines). The variability—sometimes praised, sometimes strongly criticized—suggests prospective families should visit multiple times, ask pointed questions about dementia-specific staffing and training, medication administration procedures, call response times, infection control protocols, room options (private vs shared), and management turnover before making placement decisions. Where memory care or complex clinical needs are present, reviewers indicate exercising extra caution because several accounts describe care that failed to meet those needs and, in at least one case, led to hospital readmission.
