Overall sentiment across the reviews is sharply polarized: many families and residents describe excellent care, a strong therapy program, compassionate staff and a clean, modern facility, while a substantial number of reviews raise serious, sometimes alarming concerns about negligence, inconsistent staffing, poor hygiene, medication errors, and management communication. The positive reports emphasize skilled rehab outcomes, individualized attention, and staff who go “above and beyond,” often naming specific employees (Ed Mount, Melissa, Lisa, Sharon, Joe, Mary Beth, among others) as standout caregivers. Conversely, the negative reports contain multiple severe allegations—bedsores, blood and excrement found in rooms, medications not administered or left on the floor, and infections—that indicate significant lapses in care for some residents.
Staff and care quality are the most frequently discussed themes and also the most mixed. Many reviewers praise nurses, CNAs, and therapy teams as kind, attentive and professional; therapy departments are repeatedly highlighted for producing strong rehab results and improvement. Several staff members and departments receive high, specific praise for compassion, communication and coordination. However, multiple accounts also describe inconsistent caregiving: some aides and nurses are described as excellent while others are described as unengaged or negligent. Short staffing is commonly cited as a root cause of slow call responses, delayed showers, and missed medication administration. The pattern suggests that quality of care may vary considerably by shift, unit, or individual staff members.
Rehabilitation services are one of the clearest strengths according to many reviews. Physical and occupational therapy, a dedicated therapy area, and proactive rehab staff are often singled out as delivering positive outcomes and helping residents make progress. Families repeatedly recommend the facility for short-term rehab and respite stays because of these results and the apparent focus on recovery and therapy.
Facility condition and cleanliness are described in two opposing lights. A large number of reviewers call Bey Lea “very clean,” “immaculate,” and “well-maintained,” praising gardens, outdoor spaces, dining rooms, and newly renovated areas. At the same time, other reviewers detail severe sanitation problems—ants, musty bedding, brown urine in bags, blood and excrement on walls, and strong odors. These divergent reports imply inconsistent housekeeping and infection control practices across units or over time: some residents benefit from an orderly, pleasant environment, while others encountered unacceptable conditions.
Dining and nutrition receive mixed to negative feedback overall. Multiple reviewers praise the dining staff, guest meal accommodations, large dining room and personalized meals prepared for special diets. Yet a substantial number of families report poor food quality—cold meals, thin portions, repeated wrong meals, and a lack of vegetarian/plant-based options—with some describing the food as “horrendous” or likening meals to “mystery meat.” The frequency of complaints about meal temperature, presentation and dietary accommodation implies the dining program is inconsistent and a common source of dissatisfaction.
Safety, clinical care and medication management are significant areas of concern in the negative reviews. Several accounts describe missed or delayed medications (including seizure meds and other critical drugs), medication left on the floor, and delayed oxygen reinsertion. There are reports of inadequate wound care that allegedly led to infection, staples coming loose without detection, and patients becoming sicker or moved to hospice sooner than expected. A few reviews describe extremely serious outcomes, including hospitalization and death, and allegations that staff responded poorly or delayed family notification. These reports indicate patterns of clinical risk that families should consider carefully when evaluating the facility.
Management, communication and administrative issues are uneven. Many reviewers praise admissions staff, social workers (particularly Ed Mount), activity directors and administrators for being clear, helpful and compassionate—highlighting good coordination around transitions, billing transparency in some cases, and emotional support. Conversely, other reviewers report poor communication, ignored paperwork, slow or absent responses to concerns, billing mistakes, and at least one allegation of financial exploitation. Several families reported that improvements only occurred after persistent pushing from relatives, suggesting that escalation is sometimes necessary to achieve acceptable resolution.
Activities and social engagement are predominantly praised. The activities department, music visits, bingo, parties, decorations and individualized programming receive strong positive feedback. Many residents reportedly enjoy daily activities and social interaction, and staff in activities are often singled out as making a meaningful difference in residents’ days.
Notable patterns and considerations for prospective families: 1) The facility appears to have clear strengths in rehabilitation, therapy, and certain compassionate staff members who deliver exceptional care; 2) quality appears highly variable across shifts, staff, and possibly units—resulting in both exemplary experiences and severe negative incidents; 3) clinical safety issues (medication delays, wound care, infection control) are the most serious recurring negative themes and should be investigated during any tour or transition; 4) dining and housekeeping consistency are recurring issues—ask specific questions about dietary accommodations, meal service, laundry, pest control, and cleaning schedules; and 5) strong social work and activities support are real assets noted by many families.
In summary, Complete Care at Bey Lea elicits strongly mixed reviews. Many families recommend the facility for short-term rehab and praise particular staff members, therapy results, and the activities program. At the same time, an important subset of reviewers detail troubling clinical and hygiene failures, medication management errors, and communication or management lapses. Prospective residents and families should weigh the facility’s rehabilitation strengths and committed staff against the documented variability in care quality, and should conduct careful, specific checks regarding medication protocols, staffing levels, infection control, wound management, dietary accommodations, and how the administration handles complaints and escalations before deciding on placement.
