Overall sentiment across the reviews is overwhelmingly negative. Multiple reviewers describe Meadow View Care as an unsanitary, unsafe, and poorly managed facility, with recurring complaints about cleanliness, odors, food quality, staffing, resident safety, and alleged theft. While one reviewer noted that programs or activities 'seemed interesting,' that isolated positive comment is heavily outweighed by consistent, detailed reports of serious problems.
Facilities and cleanliness: Reviewers repeatedly describe the physical facility as filthy and depressing. Specific complaints include pervasive foul odors (urine and cigarette smoke), urine found on chairs and hallway floors, dirty and unusable bathrooms, cluttered spaces, and reports of bedbugs. Furniture is described as broken or ill-fitting (e.g., ill-fitting mattresses, broken dressers), and many rooms lack basic amenities such as televisions. Overall, the facility's appearance and hygiene are major and consistent concerns.
Dining and nutrition: Dining receives strong negative feedback. Meals are characterized as insufficient, unhealthy, and low quality — one review specifically cites 'bologna sandwiches' as an example of the poor menu. Other descriptors used include 'disgusting,' 'sparse,' and 'not enough to survive.' Several reviewers consider the food service unacceptable given the needs of residents, and link poor meal quality to neglect of resident well-being.
Care quality and resident safety: Multiple reviewers allege neglect and inadequate care. Reports include medication mismanagement (meds not given out correctly), inconsistent staffing (no staff on weekends or staff that lie about being present), and incidents raising safety concerns (a reported groping incident). Reviewers describe staff as uncaring toward residents, and many say rules and protections for residents are not enforced. Together, these complaints point to systemic problems with day-to-day care and resident safety.
Staff behavior and administration: Problems with staff conduct and management are prominent. Reviewers report rude or abusive behavior (including kitchen staff yelling at residents), alleged impairment or severe unprofessionalism among office staff, and poor personal presentation of housekeeping staff. Administrative issues include never-answered phones, no voicemail, favoritism, alleged theft of residents' money and personal items, and an overriding perception that operators are 'money-focused.' Several reviews explicitly call out poor administration and dishonesty. One review mentions an imminent state investigation, indicating reviewers perceive potential regulatory violations.
Capacity, amenities, and value: The facility is described as overcrowded, with several mentions of shared rooms housing three or four people, absence of TVs in rooms, and lack of transportation after hours. Reviewers also repeatedly state that the monthly cost (reports range from $840 to $1,000) is inappropriate or 'absurd' given the facility condition and level of care. The combination of high cost and poor service leads many reviewers to conclude the facility is not a good value.
Patterns, severity, and implications: The complaints are consistent across many different review summaries, suggesting systemic issues rather than isolated incidents. Themes cluster around sanitation/pest problems, food inadequacy, staffing shortages or absenteeism, mismanagement, alleged theft, and safety lapses. The presence of multiple serious allegations (bedbugs, theft of money/clothing, groping, medication errors) elevates these beyond mere dissatisfaction with aesthetics — reviewers express concerns about resident health, dignity, and safety.
Practical considerations for families and referrals: Based on these reviews, prospective residents and families should exercise caution. Recommended steps include conducting unannounced visits at different times (including weekends and evenings), inspecting rooms and bathrooms for cleanliness and pests, asking for documentation of state inspections and any ongoing investigations, verifying staffing levels and medication administration policies, requesting references from current families, sampling meals, and confirming policies on theft, personal property, and transportation. If allegations such as bedbugs, theft, or medication errors are of concern, contacting local regulatory agencies or the state survey office for inspection records is warranted.
In summary, the dominant impression from these reviews is a pattern of neglectful conditions, poor management, and insufficient care at Meadow View Care. While activities or programs were noted as potentially interesting by one reviewer, that single positive point does not offset pervasive and serious concerns about hygiene, resident safety, food quality, staff behavior, and alleged financial exploitation. The reviews suggest an urgent need for corrective action by management or regulators to address these widespread issues.
