Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly polarized but leans heavily toward serious concerns, with recurring and severe complaints about neglect, safety, cleanliness, theft, and management. Numerous reviewers describe alarming incidents—unsanitary conditions including feces on walls, alleged theft of personal items and packages, laundry repeatedly mishandled, and staff reportedly sleeping on duty. Some reviewers recount traumatic experiences such as a resident’s death with no acknowledgement or condolences and claims of residents being left in wheelchairs around the clock. These accounts point to both failures in daily caregiving practices and lapses in basic maintenance and dignity for residents.
Care quality appears inconsistent and situational. Several reviewers praise individual caregivers and describe ‘‘tremendous’’ and ‘‘professional’’ care from certain staff members, and the receptionist and a staff member named Robert received specific positive mentions. However, these favorable experiences coexist with repeated reports of neglectful and abusive behavior, including staff making hostile remarks on phones and an overall perception of being short-staffed and overwhelmed. The contrast suggests variability across shifts or teams: when experienced, attentive staff are praised highly; when absent or overburdened, care quality reportedly drops to unacceptable levels.
Staffing and professionalism are major themes. Many reviewers report uncaring, rude, or disrespectful behavior from front-desk and administrative staff, with complaints about dismissive attitudes toward residents’ belongings and families. There are allegations of dishonesty, incompetence, and even scamming or overcharging by administration. Specific management figures (Cindy/Cynthia) are named in criticism, indicating perceived leadership failures. Conversely, some recent reviews claim a morale uplift under new management and call out staff members who are easy to work with, reflecting a reported managerial turnover and an attempted operational turnaround.
Facility condition and safety are repeatedly questioned. Reports of power outages without functional generators and elevators failing—creating critical risks for wheelchair users—are particularly concerning. Several reviewers explicitly describe the building as an old apartment converted into a nursing-like environment, with safety infrastructure not meeting the needs of vulnerable residents. Cleanliness issues, such as filth and bodily waste in resident areas, go beyond simple maintenance complaints and suggest inadequate housekeeping protocols or insufficient oversight.
Belongings and laundry management emerge as a distinct pattern of issues: multiple reviewers cite lost or stolen items, packages going missing, and laundry that is not returned or is unrecognized. These repeated reports of property loss amplify broader trust issues between families and staff/administration and have prompted some reviewers to advise legal action or to recommend avoiding the facility entirely.
Communication is another area of frequent complaint. Many reviewers describe ignored calls, unresponsive or unhelpful staff, and poor coordination with families. At the same time, a subset of reviewers notes clear, effective phone and in-person communication, again underscoring inconsistent experiences depending on who is working or what management is in place.
There are signs of positive change reported by multiple reviewers: mentions of new management, remodeling, a brand-new wing, ongoing upgrades, and an increase in staffing suggest a concerted effort at remediation. Several reviews praise the recent improvements and express optimism about outcomes, calling the facility ‘‘amazing’’ under new administration. These positive accounts are important but appear mixed with many recent or earlier strongly negative reports, so any improvement narrative should be viewed in the context of lingering and serious allegations.
In summary, the compiled reviews present a facility with two very different faces: one where individual staff and some recent management efforts produce high-quality, compassionate care, and another where systemic problems—neglect, unsafe conditions, theft, poor sanitation, deficient emergency infrastructure, and managerial incompetence—have caused significant harm and distress. Families considering Creve Coeur Manor should weigh the frequency and severity of the negative reports (safety risks, alleged abuse/neglect, and property loss) against the claims of recent improvement. Prospective residents and their families should ask for detailed, documented changes from current management (staffing ratios, housekeeping protocols, security for residents’ belongings, emergency power systems, elevator reliability, and formal complaint resolution processes) and seek references from current families who have experienced the facility after the reported managerial changes before making decisions.
