Overall sentiment in these review summaries is mixed but leans positive around direct care staff and therapeutic services, while administrative, facility, and dining issues receive repeated criticism. Multiple reviewers specifically praise the nursing staff, social worker, and physical therapists for providing excellent, attentive care and enabling strong recoveries. Housekeeping also receives explicit positive mention for thorough room cleaning. Individual caregivers are named and praised (assistants Anita and Maria), and several comments describe the staff as warm, top‑notch, and welcoming. One set of remarks even highlights positive change under new management and describes the facility as thriving, indicating improvements have been noticed by some families.
At the same time, there are consistent concerns about the physical plant and nonclinical services. Several reviewers describe the facility as aging or in poor condition, which may contrast with praise for staff performance and could affect overall resident comfort and perception. Food quality is mentioned as a concern by multiple reviewers, suggesting dining is an area needing attention. Practical issues such as lack of off‑street parking also appear, which can be an important logistical drawback for visiting families and vendors.
Communication and administrative responsiveness emerge as another clear theme. Reviewers report unresponsive office staff and frustrations that doctors are not communicating directly with family members. One reviewer noted that their father had not recuperated after four months, which may reflect either clinical complexity or perceived shortcomings in medical oversight/communication. There are also discrepancies and annoyances around posted hours — specifically a lunch hours discrepancy and a Google listing that shows a 4:00 pm closing time and a request to update those hours — pointing to inconsistent or outdated information being provided to the public.
While many comments are positive about caregivers and therapy services, there is at least one strongly negative summary that states “horrible, never again,” indicating that experiences can vary considerably between residents and families. This outlier reinforces the need for prospective residents and families to ask specific questions about their concerns, tour the facility, and check the most recent status of management and maintenance efforts.
In sum, the dominant strengths reported are the quality and kindness of direct care staff (nurses, aides, therapists, social worker) and clean rooms thanks to housekeeping. The dominant weaknesses are the building condition, food/dining quality, parking limitations, and administrative/physician communication problems, along with inconsistent public information about hours. There are signs of positive change under new management according to some reviewers, but variability in experiences — including at least one severe negative report — suggests due diligence is important for prospective families. If considering this facility, prioritize direct conversations about clinical oversight and communication practices, recent maintenance or renovation plans, dining menus/standards, parking arrangements, and confirmation of current hours and contact responsiveness.
