Overall sentiment about Riverdale Manor is highly mixed and polarized: some reviewers describe an excellent, renovated, home-like facility with dedicated staff and good programming, while others report serious safety, cleanliness, and management failures that make the community unsafe and unsuitable for vulnerable residents. The reviews cluster around two distinct narratives — one of marked improvement and strong person-centered care under new or attentive management, and another of hazardous conditions, inadequate oversight, and unprofessional staff. This bifurcation suggests either substantial variability by unit/wing or a transition period in ownership/management that has not been experienced uniformly by all residents or families.
Care quality and staff performance are among the most frequently discussed topics. Many reviewers praise staff as warm, professional, and hands-on: reports include staff who "go above and beyond," aides and administration who make transitions easier for families, and an overall dedication that makes the place feel like home. Several positive accounts note excellent communication, supportive receptionists, and staff who are understanding of special needs. Conversely, a significant number of reviews describe unhelpful, rude, or deceitful behavior from staff, with some accounts of poor responses during injuries and a perceived decline in care after a dementia diagnosis. There are also repeated mentions that staff appear overworked, which likely contributes to inconsistent service and communication problems.
Safety and security are major areas of concern for many reviewers. Multiple summaries explicitly call the environment unsafe or hazardous: residents smoking inside or in rooms, absence of smoke alarms and no fire extinguisher, garbage and bad smells outdoors, and rotten or dilapidated furniture. Some reviewers felt the facility was "worse than jail" or "not safe for my mother," citing too much freedom with people roaming and slack security. There are also reports of potential abuse or neglect, and several reviewers recommend having a backup plan for residents. These safety issues contrast with other accounts that describe roomy, safe-feeling rooms — reinforcing the theme of inconsistency across experiences.
Facilities and amenities show similar contradictions. Positive reviews frequently note recent renovations, a nicer appearance, social areas, outside seating, and activities (karaoke and staffed programs). Some reviewers say food, medication management, cleaning services, and even on-site doctors and nurses are available. However, negative reviews describe an apartment-like building missing basic amenities (no refrigerator, no stove, no store to shop for food), poor meals or limited food variety, old rotten furniture, and unclean common areas. High rent was also raised as a concern by some who felt the cost did not match the level of services or safety provided.
Management and transparency come up repeatedly. A number of reviewers report improvements under new owners or speculate that management changes are taking place that could improve the residency experience. Those positive accounts credit hands-on administration and a dedication to resident care. In contrast, negative reviews highlight poor communication, lack of transparency about incidents and camera footage, and deceitful advertising (misleading website information). These governance and communication issues exacerbate family anxiety, particularly when safety problems or health declines occur.
Activities and social life are generally seen as strengths when present: several reviews mention active programming, social areas, and opportunities for engagement that contribute to residents’ quality of life. At the same time, there are comments about residents appearing depressed and limited food variety, which suggests that programming and nutrition may not consistently meet all residents’ needs.
Patterns and takeaways: the most salient pattern is inconsistency. Some families and residents report exemplary care, modernized facilities, and thoughtful staff, while others report hazardous conditions, poor hygiene, and insufficient oversight. This variability may be caused by uneven management implementation, staffing shortages, different conditions in different wings or rooms, or a facility in transition under new ownership. For prospective residents or family members, the reviews signal two practical considerations: (1) verify current safety measures (smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, smoking policies and enforcement, security protocols) and the condition of the specific unit you would occupy, and (2) ask for up-to-date, specific information on staffing levels, staff training for dementia care, incident reporting policies, camera/camera-transparency policies, and recent inspection or improvement records.
In summary, Riverdale Manor elicits both strong praise and serious alarms. Positive reviews highlight caring staff, social activities, renovation work, and services that make the community feel like home for some residents. Negative reports raise critical red flags about safety, cleanliness, communication, and inconsistent care — especially for residents with dementia or higher-acuity needs. Anyone considering this facility should conduct an on-site, detailed tour, speak with current residents and families about recent changes, confirm safety and medical coverage details in writing, and evaluate whether a specific unit’s conditions and staffing match their expectations and needs.
