Overall sentiment in these reviews is strongly positive but punctuated with a small number of serious negative allegations. The majority of reviewers emphasize high-quality, compassionate care and a warm, community-oriented living environment. Staff are repeatedly described as kind, professional, responsive, and attentive; many reviews highlight specific strengths such as hospice care provided with dignity, daily housekeeping that keeps the facility smelling fresh, and caregivers who treat residents with respect. Multiple residents and family members report smooth move-ins, helpful transition support, and ongoing communication about plans and options. Long-tenured residents (including very old residents noted by reviewers) and repeated recommendations suggest consistent satisfaction over time.
Care quality and clinical services are frequently praised. Reviewers note the availability of a full continuum of care—independent living through on-site rehab, physical therapy (including some in-apartment PT), Medicare-covered short stays, and hospice—giving families and residents peace of mind that needs can be met as they change. Several reviews call out professional, attentive nursing and caregiving staff and effective coordination of care. That said, there are multiple references to medication changes during stays which some family members found concerning; this points to the need for clear communication about clinical care plans.
Staff and culture are dominant positive themes. Numerous comments describe staff as compassionate, hospitable, and deserving of praise or raises. Reviewers repeatedly mention a welcoming atmosphere, greetings when visiting, and staff who go beyond to accommodate residents and families (e.g., staying in a vacant room for visits, assisting with apartment customization like counter and tile choices). Residents report meaningful friendships, an active volunteer culture (Gift Shop), and a strong sense of community—many noting that they ‘‘love living here’’ and would not want to leave. The activities department receives frequent praise for offering a wide array of programming: daily crafts and games, lectures, concerts, music, luncheons, and garden/backyard events that create a vibrant social life.
Facility, dining, and amenities are also strengths. The building and grounds are described as attractive and meticulously maintained; common spaces and dining areas are clean, current, and comfortable. Dining and café options are praised for good meals and social breakfast or cafe experiences. Apartment design features and customization options are noted positively, with reviewers appreciating layout, decoration choices, and a home-like feel. Guest accommodations and on-site dining make family visitation and stays convenient for relatives.
However, a non-trivial cluster of serious concerns appears in the reviews and must be highlighted. Several reviewers allege neglectful or abusive behavior: claims include not providing fluids (leading to dehydration), not repositioning residents, leaving a resident in a wet diaper, and staff yelling at residents. Some reviewers say administration was unresponsive and that family visitation was restricted at times. A few reviews are particularly severe—one mentions a potential death due to lack of care—and another calls for investigation and gives a zero rating. There are also allegations of unethical staff behavior and manipulation around charities or fundraising, with one individual named. These reports are in stark contrast to the many positive testimonies and suggest that experiences may vary significantly by unit, shift, or specific staff members.
Operational issues are mixed. Short staffing is mentioned several times and could be related to some of the negative care reports—staff shortages can strain the ability to provide consistent, attentive care. Front desk or customer-facing personnel were called ‘‘uncaring’’ or ‘‘superior’’ in a minority of accounts, and construction-related disruptions (including cancelled tours with limited notice) were a source of frustration for some prospective residents and visitors. Food and fluids being wasted was cited by at least one reviewer, and medication changes during a stay raised concerns for others, indicating potential communication or process gaps.
In summary, Crestwood Manor receives predominantly positive feedback for caregiving quality, cleanliness, social programming, and facility upkeep, with many long-term residents expressing strong satisfaction and a sense of community. At the same time, there are alarming, though less frequent, complaints alleging neglect, abusive behavior, unethical conduct, and administrative unresponsiveness. These conflicting patterns suggest generally strong performance but with notable exceptions that prospective residents and families should investigate. When considering Crestwood Manor, ask management for recent inspection reports, staffing ratios by shift, incident and complaint resolution protocols, examples of staff training and supervision, and references from current residents/families. Verifying how the community prevents, investigates, and resolves serious care concerns will help balance the overwhelmingly positive themes against the severe allegations present in these reviews.
