Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly mixed and polarized, with a clear pattern: rehabilitation and therapy services are frequently praised and can produce strong, measurable outcomes, while core nursing care, administration, and facility operations show repeated, serious concerns. Many reviewers highlight outstanding therapy teams and individual caregivers who helped residents recover, walk again, and return home. Specific therapy staff were named and thanked, and families credited rehabilitation with substantial improvements in mobility and function. Activities programming and some elements of front-desk/security operations also receive positive mentions, creating a sense that parts of the facility can be energetic, welcoming, and supportive.
However, these positives are repeatedly overshadowed by a large volume of reports describing unsafe and neglectful care. Numerous reviewers report medication errors and delays, including missed insulin doses and late pain medication, which in multiple accounts led to significant medical deterioration and hospital transfers, sometimes to ICU. There are multiple specific allegations of life-threatening lapses: delayed response to respiratory distress, infection and bed sore progression because wounds were not cleaned, and residents left in feces or soiled diapers for extended periods. Call buttons were described as broken or missing, in-room phones absent, and staff sometimes distracted (on personal phones) or allegedly intoxicated, creating an unsafe environment in several accounts.
Staffing and continuity of care are recurring themes. Reviewers frequently cite high turnover, understaffing, and heavy use of agency staff, leading to inconsistent care. Morning and overnight shifts are sometimes described as competent, but evenings and weekends are commonly reported as poorly staffed or inattentive. This inconsistent staffing pattern is linked to many of the problems noted: medication delays, inadequate showering/hygiene, missed vitals and physician visits, and poor infection-control practices. While many individual staff members are praised as compassionate and professional, administration and social work draw strong criticism for poor communication, dishonesty, withholding discharge or hospice information, and mishandling transitions of care. Several reviews specifically warn that social workers or administrators misled families about discharges, payments, or facility conditions.
Facility condition and operations show wide variability in reviewer experience. Some families describe a clean, odorless building with friendly staff and effective security procedures, while many others report an old, dilapidated environment with pest sightings (flies, cockroaches, occasional bed bug reports), unsanitary laundry practices, and broken essential amenities (nonfunctional showers, uncontrolled heating, loud oxygen generators). Dining is another significant problem area—reports of cold, spoiled, or insufficient food, no posted menus, and kitchen staff shortages appear frequently and contribute to the perception of neglect and inadequate daily living support.
Infection control and COVID-related practices are inconsistent. Multiple reviewers describe poor PPE use, inappropriate transfers from COVID-negative to positive units, long quarantine periods with limited communication, and a lack of routine family updates. These concerns compound the sense of unsafe care when combined with medication errors and delayed responses to medical emergencies.
A notable pattern is the polarized and sometimes contradictory nature of the reviews. Several families report recent improvements (for example, positive changes over the last seven months), and some reviews urge trust in certain teams and recommend the facility. Others give strenuous warnings—using words like "terrible," "torturous," and "criminal"—strongly advising against placing loved ones at the facility. This polarity suggests that patient experience may depend heavily on timing, unit, specific staff on duty, and whether an individual receives rehabilitation-focused versus long-term nursing care.
Practical takeaways: if families are considering this facility, they should verify in advance: current staffing ratios for the unit and shifts, medication administration processes (especially for insulin and PRN pain meds), infection-control policies, emergency-transfer protocols, and how discharges and billing will be handled. Ask for names of primary caregivers, confirm presence and function of call buttons and in-room phones, inspect cleanliness and pest-control measures, and get written clarity on how social work and administration will communicate updates. The facility demonstrably has strengths in therapy and individual compassionate caregivers, but repeated reports of medication errors, neglect, unsafe conditions, poor administration, and inconsistent infection control represent significant risks. Families should weigh the strong rehabilitation outcomes reported by some against the documented safety and quality-of-care concerns and consider monitoring closely or looking for alternatives if continuity and nursing reliability are essential.
