Overall sentiment across the review summaries is mixed but leans positive regarding direct care and rehabilitation services. A strong, recurring theme is that many reviewers find the caregiving staff compassionate, kind, and attentive; several reviews single out staff who go "the extra mile," with one reviewer describing staff as "angels" and others noting that the facility provides exemplary or heartfelt care. The facility's affiliation with Auburn Community Hospital and around-the-clock nursing supervision are repeatedly highlighted as important strengths, especially for residents who require post-surgical rehab or closer medical oversight. Multiple reviewers described positive rehab experiences, good outcomes after surgery, and a separate hospital-affiliated rehab setup that they viewed favorably.
Staffing and responsiveness present a prominent and persistent concern. While many reviewers praise individual staff members and overall compassion, a substantial number also report understaffing and staff being overworked or underappreciated. That understaffing appears to contribute to practical problems: occasional delays in assistance, long bathroom wait times, and reports that some aides would not perform certain care tasks (for example, not showering rehab patients). These negative staffing-related accounts create a tension in the overall narrative: the facility is praised for quality and kindness, yet capacity shortfalls sometimes produce lapses in timeliness or consistency of care.
Facility- and environment-related comments are mostly positive but include specific complaints. Reviewers note the center is clean, has decent rooms with good lighting, and provides a secure, fenced-in courtyard that families appreciate. Food is frequently mentioned positively — several reviewers cite good meals and a variety of choices. However, multiple reviewers raised concerns about room climate control: rooms being too hot, humidity issues, and residents having difficulty sleeping because of environmental conditions. These repeated remarks suggest climate control and comfort could be improved for some residents.
Activities and family engagement show mixed feedback. Several reviews indicate an active schedule and that residents (including one reviewer’s mother) enjoyed and benefited from activities, while at least one reviewer described a lack of wide variety in activities. Family communication is often praised — reviewers mention staff being supportive toward family and responsive to family concerns — but this is contrasted by complaints about the admissions process and front-desk responsiveness. Multiple reviewers reported problems contacting admissions staff, voicemail failures, and slow or no callbacks from the admissions director, which may reflect administrative communication gaps rather than direct-care performance.
Management and leadership perceptions are mixed. On the positive side, some reviewers appreciate visible leadership involvement (David Meyers was specifically cited for personal involvement), and others describe an overall supportive administrative environment. Conversely, a few reviewers criticized the administrator directly and characterized management as problematic. This split suggests variability in families' interactions with leadership or inconsistent administrative performance over time or between individuals.
Safety and clinical reliability receive favorable notes (24/7 nursing and reports of no medication errors), but one reviewer expressed concern about hospitalization/transfer procedures. Given the facility's hospital affiliation, many families likely value the medical linkage, but some reviewers still worry about transfer logistics or outcomes in acute situations.
In summary, Finger Lakes Center For Living appears to deliver strong, compassionate hands-on care for many residents, with particular strengths in rehabilitation, clinical oversight, cleanliness, and meals. The most significant recurring weaknesses involve understaffing and related timeliness/consistency issues, inconsistent administrative responsiveness (especially at admissions), and room climate/comfort concerns. Reviews show variability in experience — many highly positive accounts alongside a meaningful minority of critical ones — indicating the facility often meets or exceeds expectations but may have intermittent operational challenges that impact certain residents or families. Prospective residents and families should weigh the evident clinical strengths and hospital affiliation against reported staffing and administrative shortcomings, and consider asking targeted questions about staffing levels, admissions responsiveness, room climate controls, and specific activity offerings during visits or tours.
