Overall sentiment across the reviews is strongly negative, with many reviewers describing serious care, management, sanitary, and safety problems at Heritage Care Center. The most frequently cited issues relate to poor personal care (residents left in urine or feces, long gaps between showers, laundry mismanagement), meal quality and nutrition (meals high in sodium, overcooked/cold food, resident weight loss), and staff competence/attitude (inexperienced DON/administrator and nursing leadership, CNAs described as lazy or uncaring). Several reviewers claim that problems have escalated compared with the facility's condition 10–15 years ago.
Care quality and clinical oversight: Multiple reviews allege inadequate monitoring and medical response: delayed or absent notification to families, inconsistent medication administration, and allegations that residents were ignored until hospitalization or that a resident died while at the facility and was not sent to the hospital. There are repeated claims of negligent medical care and abandonment (residents left alone or poorly monitored). Reviewers identify the DON and administration as inexperienced and isolated behind closed doors, which reviewers link to a breakdown in clinical accountability and poor response to incidents.
Staffing and behavior patterns: The staffing picture is mixed but dominated by negative reports. Many reviewers describe CNAs and nursing staff as uncaring, rude, or unprofessional; phone calls often go unanswered and administration is described as dismissive. Multiple accounts mention at least one male CNA accused of abusive behavior with no corrective action taken. Conversely, a smaller number of reviewers praise individual staff members — notably one highly qualified CNA, several long-term CNAs, a maintenance worker, and some housekeeping staff — and recount warm, 1:1 attention from specific caregivers. These positive mentions are scattered and tend to emphasize individual employees rather than systemic strengths.
Facilities, cleanliness, and safety: Numerous reviewers describe persistent odors of urine and feces, a general stench on entry, and in at least one case cockroach sightings. There are concerns about cleaning standards and kitchen hygiene, including alleged improper food safety measures. Some reviewers note pleasant smells and cleanliness in certain instances, indicating inconsistency in environmental maintenance. Safety concerns extend beyond cleanliness: reviewers allege restricted exit access (lockdown status), poor monitoring of residents, and an overall penitentiary-like atmosphere reported by several families.
Dining and nutrition: Food quality and nutrition are consistent themes. Meals are repeatedly called high in sodium, overcooked, cold, and unappetizing; several reviewers connect poor food to resident weight loss. Concerns about kitchen practices and food safety are also mentioned, and these dining problems are framed as contributing to declining resident health and dignity.
Communication, management, and accountability: Reviewers frequently complain about poor communication from management and the care team, including inconsistent updates from social workers and failure to notify families about important events (including death). Administration is described as unresponsive, isolated, and sometimes antagonistic. Some reviewers believe the facility prioritizes census and revenue over resident well-being. There are allegations of mishandling of residents' belongings and disputes over property, and calls from reviewers for regulatory intervention, shutdown, or takeover.
Serious allegations and outcomes: A number of reviews include severe claims — allegations of abuse, medication errors, negligence leading to a resident's death, and state guardian negligence. These are grave accusations that appear multiple times in different forms (failure to send residents to hospital, lack of monitoring, and delayed family notification). Reviewers express distress, fear for loved ones' safety, and calls for closure of the facility.
Positive pockets and variability: Although the dominant tone is negative, several reviews highlight positive experiences with individual staff members or specific aspects of programming. Reported positives include warm and engaging employees who provide one-on-one attention, inclusive programming and conversations, staff enthusiasm, and occasional helpful or friendly administrative interactions. These positives appear localized — tied to specific people or shifts — and do not offset the widespread complaints about systemic failures.
Patterns and takeaway: The reviews portray a facility with significant inconsistency: some staff deliver compassionate, competent care while others are accused of neglect or abuse. Systemic problems are repeatedly noted in leadership, communication, sanitation, and nutrition, with multiple reviewers concluding that the facility's highest priorities appear financial (census) rather than clinical or person-centered care. Given the severity and recurrence of allegations — unaddressed abuse, medication errors, poor hygiene, and failures to notify families — the reviews collectively suggest urgent need for external review, stronger clinical oversight, improved staffing and training, clearer communication protocols, and remediation of environmental and food-safety concerns. Families’ experiences vary substantially depending on staff on duty, but the volume and gravity of negative reports indicate persistent, facility-level issues rather than isolated incidents.
