The review set for ClaRu DeVille Nursing Center shows a deeply mixed and polarized picture with clear pockets of strong, compassionate care alongside serious and recurring safety and management concerns. Multiple reviewers praise specific staff members and shifts for being welcoming, supportive, and team-oriented; these accounts emphasize activities, positive resident moods, good food, clean units, and successful short-term rehab discharges. At least one unit (referenced as unit 5) and various named staff and activities (karaoke, holiday parties) are singled out as examples where residents and families felt respected and at home.
Conversely, a substantial number of reviews allege severe lapses in care and safety. The most frequently cited problems include medication mismanagement or outright refusal to provide prescribed medicines, which in at least one account led to an emergency room visit. Reviewers report neglectful care practices—residents left in bed soiled with bodily waste—and more extreme claims that a resident's condition deteriorated (including kidney failure) and that there was a death associated with alleged negligence. Short-staffing is repeatedly mentioned as a likely contributor to these adverse outcomes and to a general decline in consistent care quality.
Staff behavior and professionalism emerge as a major dividing line. Positive reviews describe staff who treat residents like family, cheer and dance with residents, and make families feel welcome and accommodated. Negative reviews, however, contain allegations of verbal abuse, harassment (a staff member named Chris is accused in one review), aggressive conduct, and retaliation against family complaints. There are also allegations—serious but unverified in these summaries—about inappropriate hiring practices and staff substance issues. This large variance suggests significant inconsistency in staff training, supervision, and culture across shifts or units.
Facility conditions and maintenance are similarly inconsistent. Several reviewers praise housekeeping and describe clean rooms and tasty meals, while others report poor maintenance, roaches, and general run-down conditions. There are also reports of missing resident property (a motorized chair) and restrictive policies such as prohibiting cell phones, which some families found problematic for communication and transparency. Communication and transparency to families are flagged repeatedly as weak, with families describing difficulty getting clear information about medications, incidents, or the status of loved ones.
Activities and dining are frequent bright spots: multiple reviewers mention an active, enjoyable activities program and specific menu items that residents appreciate. These positives indicate that where staffing and management are functioning well, the center can provide a homelike and socially engaging environment. However, the persistence of serious safety and neglect allegations overshadows these strengths for many reviewers.
Overall pattern and caution for prospective families: reviews indicate a facility with uneven performance—some units or shifts deliver high-quality, nurturing care, while others are associated with neglect, safety incidents, and poor management. The most common themes are inconsistency, short-staffing, medication and safety risks, and variable cleanliness and maintenance. For anyone considering ClaRu DeVille, these reviews suggest it is essential to visit multiple times, ask specific questions about medication handling, staffing levels, incident reporting, and unit-level differences, and to seek written policies on family communication and resident property. The mix of strongly positive and seriously negative reports indicates potential but also risk, and families should proceed with careful, ongoing oversight if choosing this facility.
