The reviews for Delmar Gardens of Chesterfield present a sharply mixed picture in which strong, often high-performing rehabilitation and several caring staff members coexist with significant, recurring operational and clinical concerns. The most consistent positive theme is the facility’s rehabilitation program and therapy teams. Numerous reviewers praised the PT/OT services, fast initiation of therapy, skilled therapists who helped residents regain function and return home, and specific clinical strengths (CHF specialization and rapid rehab were mentioned). Short-term rehab stays frequently drew high marks for outcomes, discharge readiness, and supportive therapy teams. Transportation services (wheelchair van pickups) and amenities for therapy and wellness (large workout room, spa/ whirlpool, pool, putting green) reinforced the facility’s strength as a rehab destination.
Many reviewers also described bright, modern facilities with clean, well-kept common areas, landscaped courtyards, multiple activity spaces, and attractive amenities such as a beauty shop, bistro/ice-cream parlor, music/piano in dining, pet birds/bunnies, and multiple social programs. Several staff members and departments stood out for empathy and dedication — reviewers named individuals (e.g., Lizette, Jeremy) who were described as compassionate, helpful, and willing to go above and beyond. Where staffing was stable and consistent, families reported a warm, family-like atmosphere; long-tenured employees and friendly tour staff were frequently cited as positives.
However, this favorable picture is tempered by numerous and serious negative reports that appear recurrent and systemic across the reviews. The dominant negative themes are inconsistent staffing and care quality, high reliance on agency/contract personnel, slow or inadequate medical responses, and poor leadership/communication. Multiple family accounts describe long wait times for help, call lights ignored, residents left soiled (urine/bedwetting), dentures and hearing aids neglected or lost, and a general lack of accountability when problems occur. Several reviews describe dangerous clinical lapses — delayed recognition of medical issues, misdiagnoses by the in-house doctor, denial of tests (e.g., X-rays), preventable hospitalizations, and in at least one account, life-threatening outcomes. These reports suggest that while the facility can deliver strong rehab care, long-term nursing and medical oversight are inconsistent and occasionally inadequate.
Management and administrative responsiveness emerge as a major pain point. Multiple reviewers reported rude or demanding admissions interactions (including a cited demand for 2.5 months’ down payment for Medicaid with no guarantee of refund), dismissive or unresponsive nursing administration, and an overall business-first attitude in some cases. When families raised concerns, they sometimes experienced no callbacks, vague responses from leadership, or only partial remediation. Several reviewers also alleged overbilling, questionable medication practices, contract violations, and payroll/theft issues for staff — all of which raise governance and compliance concerns. There are also reports that the facility’s performance improves when state regulators are present, which reviewers interpreted as inconsistent standards of care tied to external oversight.
Infection control and cleanliness generate mixed feedback: while many visitors and families praised a bright, clean environment with no odors, other reviews reported serious pest issues (cockroaches seen in beds and food), dirty rooms, and lapses in hand hygiene. These contradictory accounts suggest variability across wings, shifts, or timeframes — clean conditions in some units and troubling sanitation problems in others.
Dining and daily living services also received mixed marks. Several reviewers praised dining atmosphere (piano music, good food) and meal quality, while many others reported cold or tasteless meals, limited kitchen hours, unclear bistro signage, and inconvenient food availability. Families noted that the facility can feel institutional (hospital-like rooms, hospital beds) rather than homelike, particularly in shared rooms. Cost is frequently mentioned as a downside — private rooms cited as expensive (reports of $9,000–$12,000/month) — which increases expectations for consistently high-quality care that some reviewers feel was not met.
Safety and resident handling concerns were particularly alarming in a few reports: unsafe transport of a blind resident, inadequate accommodations for vision impairment, and incidents where residents were not properly assisted during transfers. Visitation access and communication were also criticized, especially around dementia care where delays and restricted access were linked to rapid decline in one account. There are also a handful of serious complaints alleging discriminatory or racist behavior by administrators or staff, which families highlighted as deeply troubling.
Overall sentiment across reviews is polarized. When the right staff are present, many families report exceptional, compassionate care, strong rehab outcomes, and a pleasant community with meaningful activities and amenities. When staffing is inconsistent, leadership unresponsive, or agency personnel prevalent, care quality drops dramatically — evidenced by neglect, medical errors, sanitation problems, and poor family communication. The pattern suggests variability by unit, shift, or time period rather than uniformly excellent or uniformly poor operation.
For families considering Delmar Gardens of Chesterfield, these reviews point to the importance of targeted questions and close observation during tours: ask about current staff-to-resident ratios, use of agency/contract staff, recent inspection/incident history, infection-control measures, meal service hours, Medicaid billing and refund policies, and how management handles complaints and clinical escalation. Request to see the specific neighborhood/unit where a loved one would reside (to compare cleanliness and activity levels), and ask for references from recent families who had long-term stays rather than short-term rehab only. The facility shows clear strengths in therapy and amenities and has many devoted caregivers, but persistent and recurring operational concerns mean families should perform careful, up-to-date vetting and monitor care closely after any move-in.
