Overall sentiment in the reviews for Elderwood of Lakeside at Brockport is highly mixed and polarized. A substantial subset of reviewers praise the facility for its caring individual staff, skilled rehabilitation and therapy services, and clean, well-maintained environment with good amenities. Another substantial subset reports serious failures in basic care, safety, staffing, communication, and management. The result is a facility that some families strongly recommend for rehab and long-term care while others describe dangerous neglect and express regret or intent to pursue legal action.
Care quality and clinical concerns feature prominently. Positive reviews note that medical staff and therapists (physical, occupational, speech) provided attentive, effective rehabilitation and that medical staff could be pleasant and accommodating. Conversely, multiple reviews describe alarming clinical failures: a resident left in respiratory distress for nearly six hours and misdiagnosed as anxiety; delayed hospital transfers; oxygen issues; unreliable medication distribution; and inadequate geriatric evaluations. These are not isolated small complaints but represent severe safety risks when they occur, and they strongly shape negative perceptions.
Staffing and staff behavior are a major theme. Many reviewers report short staffing — particularly on night shifts and weekends — which manifests as long delays responding to call buttons, aides not returning, extended wait times for bathroom assistance, and staff appearing rushed or disengaged. Some accounts describe staff who are caring, attentive, and familial in attitude; others describe scolding, rude, or unprofessional behavior, fights among aides, and inattentive or unresponsive overnight nursing leadership. The pattern suggests inconsistent staffing levels and variable staff training or oversight producing highly divergent resident experiences depending on shift and personnel.
Facilities, rehabilitation, and amenities receive generally positive notes. Several reviewers describe the building as clean and well-maintained, appreciate on-site rehab services, and value proximity to hospital services (ER, lab, surgical unit). Activities (Bingo, arts & crafts, movies), a beauty salon, and transportation options are mentioned as positive quality-of-life elements. These strengths appear to be reliable selling points, and multiple families indicate satisfaction with the rehab teams and the therapy outcomes.
Dining and nutrition show mixed but important concerns. Some residents and families find the food acceptable or good, and therapy/rehab patients report adequate meals. However, there are repeated complaints about limited menu choices (reports of only two entrees), poor food quality (meals hard to chew, powdered eggs disliked), and dangerous dietary lapses: diabetics served high-glucose foods and juices, and heart or kidney patients receiving high-sodium meals. These dietary management issues, together with reports of weight loss and vulnerable intake experiences, represent a clinical risk and a substantial source of family dissatisfaction.
Communication, administration, and transparency are other recurring problem areas. Many reviews cite poor communication with families, unanswered phone calls and voicemails, and difficulty reaching reception or management. Some reviewers accuse administration of downplaying or covering up incidents (after-hours calls to hospital rooms alleged), and several note that family concerns were not addressed or returned. Positive mentions of helpful front-desk staff appear, but they are inconsistent. These administrative shortcomings exacerbate clinical and staffing issues by eroding trust and making advocacy difficult for families.
Sanitation, basic caregiving, and dignity issues appear in several accounts: residents left soiled, shared bathrooms with dementia patients, clothing sizing errors that caused skin irritation, and general neglect in personal hygiene. For families, these kinds of lapses are especially impactful; they contribute to statements of regret over placement and urgent calls to advocate for loved ones. Combined with reports of medication and dietary mistakes, these complaints create a narrative of safety and quality-of-care variability.
In summary, the dominant patterns are (1) clear strengths in rehab, therapy, cleanliness, and some dedicated staff; and (2) serious and recurring weaknesses in staffing consistency, clinical safety on certain shifts, dietary and medication management, communication, and administrative responsiveness. The experiences vary greatly by shift, unit, and individual staff: some families feel entirely comfortable and recommend the facility, while others report neglect severe enough to pose immediate health risks. For prospective residents and families, this means that outcomes may depend heavily on timing (day vs night, weekday vs weekend), individual staff members, and the level of ongoing family advocacy. Key opportunities for improvement at the facility include increasing and stabilizing staffing (especially nights/weekends), strengthening clinical protocols for emergency recognition and transfer, improving dietary controls for restrictive diets, enforcing consistent medication administration practices, and implementing clearer, more responsive family communication and incident transparency procedures.
