Overall sentiment is highly mixed and polarized: many reviewers report exceptional rehabilitation outcomes, compassionate individual employees, and a lively activities program, while a significant number of reviews describe serious neglect, hygiene failures, and management problems. Key strengths repeatedly called out are the therapy departments (physical and occupational therapy), an engaged activities team, and some consistently praised staff in admissions, front desk, and on certain nursing shifts. Conversely, recurrent negative themes include delayed nursing responses, poor personal care (soiled diapers and bedpan neglect), medication problems, and interior cleanliness/odor issues.
Care quality shows a clear bifurcation. On the positive side, multiple families and former residents describe rapid functional gains, improved mobility, restored independence, and highly competent therapists who ‘take an interest’ and deliver consistent, effective rehab. Some nurses and aides are described as compassionate, dignified, and attentive; particular shifts (notably daytime/7–3) and named individuals receive strong commendations. On the negative side, a substantial number of reviews detail neglectful behavior: residents left sitting in wheelchairs for prolonged periods, inadequate monitoring of serious conditions (high blood sugar, heart issues), long waits for assistance (often 30–60 minutes), and medication administration errors or delays. These accounts suggest inconsistent nursing oversight and episodic failures to meet basic care standards.
Staffing and professionalism are a major pattern. Many reviewers praise individual staff members across departments (therapy, activities, reception), but numerous critiques describe unprofessional conduct by others: CNAs distracted by phones, nurses yelling or using profanity, and reports of harassment or abusive behaviors (e.g., slapping, grabbing, alleged harassment by a supervisor). There are also alarming allegations including theft by staff, suspected drug use among CNAs, and threats to residents — serious claims that contrast sharply with reports of staff who treat residents like family. The variability suggests staffing, training, supervision, and culture differ widely by shift and individual caregiver.
Facilities and housekeeping present mixed impressions. Several reviewers say the facility is clean, organized, and pleasant with thoroughly cleaned rooms and waxing/floor work in progress. Yet an equally large set of reviews describes filthy interiors: urine odors, dirty floors, soiled bedding, portable commodes left full, run-down furniture, and small outdated rooms. Laundry and personal-item management problems (lost blankets/clothing) are reported, sometimes requiring families to intervene. These opposing views again point toward inconsistent execution of housekeeping and environmental services.
Dining and nutrition are a frequent pain point. Many reports cite cold meals, missed meal services, poor-tasting food, and trays left for hours. Other reviewers report tasty, well-prepared food and praise the dining experience. Water delivery and pantry cleanliness were also singled out in negative reviews. This inconsistency in basic sustenance service is important because it affects resident health and family trust.
Activities and family engagement are strong areas. Numerous reviewers commend the activities director(s), with several naming Toinette (Tonette), Mimi, and others as positive influences who keep residents engaged, cheerful, and connected. Families appreciate facilitated video calls, Zoom visits, religious services, special events, and small treats that enhance quality of life. These programs are repeatedly credited with improving residents’ moods and daily experiences.
Management and administration responses are uneven. Some families praise admissions and social work staff for being welcoming and helpful (several staff members named positively) and credit coordination for smooth admissions and family communication. However, many reviews criticize managers and the director of nursing for being unresponsive, dismissive, or even abusive. Complaints about the discharge/exit process, door access problems, and an inability to resolve serious care concerns are recurring.
Patterns worth noting: (1) Positive experiences are often associated with short-term rehab stays where therapy staff drive outcomes and where particular shifts/staff are present. (2) Negative experiences frequently describe long-stay or overnight care scenarios — especially night shift problems, missed hygiene care, and lack of supervision. (3) There is significant staff-to-staff and shift-to-shift variability, meaning the experience depends heavily on which caregivers are on duty. (4) Several reviews include extreme allegations (abuse, theft, drug use) that warrant investigation rather than being dismissed as isolated complaints.
In conclusion, Preferred Care at Mercer demonstrates clear strengths in therapy/rehab, activities, and certain dedicated staff who deliver excellent, compassionate care. However, the volume and severity of negative reports — particularly those alleging neglect, medication errors, hygiene failures, inconsistent housekeeping, unprofessional behavior, and management unresponsiveness — are substantial and recurring. Families considering this facility should weigh the strong rehab reputation and outstanding staff members against documented risks of inconsistent nursing care, cleanliness issues, and administrative shortcomings. Prospective residents and families would be wise to meet the nursing leadership, observe multiple shifts (including nights), ask about medication management and staffing ratios, verify housekeeping and laundry procedures, and request references about specific therapists or aides prior to placement.
