Overall sentiment in the reviews for Crest Manor Living & Rehab Center is highly polarized, with a consistent pattern: the therapy teams and several individual staff members receive strong, repeated praise, while systemic problems—particularly severe understaffing, inconsistent nursing care, facility disrepair, and safety/management failures—drive the most serious negative reports. Many families describe excellent rehabilitation outcomes, attentive therapists, and social work coordination that helped secure discharges home and navigate insurance. Simultaneously, a large and vocal subset of reviewers report neglect, safety incidents, and a facility operating under strain.
Care quality and clinical concerns: The most common positive clinical theme is the excellence of physical and occupational therapy—numerous reviews attribute successful recovery, regained mobility, and timely discharges to the competence and compassion of PT/OT staff. Several PAs and specific nurses/CNAs are named positively as well. However, an equal or greater number of reviews raise troubling clinical and safety concerns. There are repeated accounts of medication errors or questionable dosing (including allegations of morphine overmedication), missed or delayed medications, and violations of feeding protocols that some reviewers link to aspiration and pneumonia. Serious safety incidents are reported: stage-4 bedsores, falls, prolonged lack of assistance leading to dangerous situations, and even deaths while in care. Missed personal care—residents reportedly not bathed for many days (one report cited 11 days), nails and hair not tended, and urine-soaked incontinence products left unattended—appears frequently and ties back to staffing shortages.
Staffing, responsiveness, and culture: Understaffing is the single most consistent negative theme. Reviews describe high nurse-to-patient ratios, overwhelmed nursing staff, and long waits for help (examples include 45-minute waits for bathroom assistance and call bells unanswered for hours). Night shift coverage and minimal night monitoring are specifically criticized. This understaffing is linked to rushed discharges, reduced oversight, and what reviewers call a “toxic” or demoralized workplace with high turnover. On the flip side, many reviewers single out individual caregivers, unit teams, and social workers (especially one often-named director, Katrina) for exemplary compassion, attention, and communication. This contrast suggests variability by unit and shift: some staff and departments perform at a high level despite systemic constraints, while other shifts and units are perceived as neglectful or abusive.
Facility condition, safety systems, and maintenance: Reviewers frequently describe the building as dated and in need of major updates. Complaints include pervasive odors, peeling wallpaper, cold or dull rooms, exposed cords or wires, stuck doors and drawers, broken elevators, burst pipes, heating failures, and plumbing issues. These physical problems contribute to the impression of a facility under-resourced for maintenance and upkeep. Several reviewers also flagged infection control and COVID isolation failures. Together, infrastructure problems and maintenance lapses raise safety and dignity concerns for long-term residents.
Dining and amenities: Opinions on food and dining are split. Some reviews praise the food service, well-presented meals, and excellent laundry/delivery logistics. However, a large portion of reviews describe food as inedible, greasy, or frozen, with wrong trays delivered and limited or no menu choices. Dining service is another area affected by staffing—reports of slow service, trays left wrong, or meals not modified per restrictions appear alongside more positive accounts.
Management, communication, and administration: Management and ownership changes recur as a source of anxiety and perceived decline. Multiple reviewers describe ownership turnover, administrative unresponsiveness, and a perception that financial motives drive decisions (examples include pressure toward private pay, abrupt Medicaid discharges, and alleged improper documentation). Communication lapses—unreturned calls, poor handoffs, lost or misplaced belongings and records, and inconsistent family engagement—are frequent. Complaints include unprofessional or rude behavior from some administrative or social work staff, though others praise specific social workers for going above and beyond. Regulatory escalation appears in some cases (Department of Health complaints cited by reviewers), underscoring the severity of certain reported incidents.
Activities and social supports: Activities programming is a widely cited bright spot. Multiple reviews praise afternoon activities, groups (men’s group, Bingo, Po-Ke-No), and social connections among residents. These programs and engaged activity staff are often credited with improving resident mood and offering structure, particularly for short-term rehab patients. Social work and discharge planning are also frequently listed as strong points when performed well—helping families navigate insurance, arrange safe discharges, and advocate for patients.
Patterns, variability, and final impressions: The reviews point to a facility that produces both outstanding and catastrophic experiences depending on unit, shift, and individual staff. Positive, five-star experiences tend to involve engaged therapy teams, attentive CNAs and nurses, and strong social work support leading to successful rehab and discharge. Negative—and sometimes severe—experiences involve understaffed shifts, delayed or missed care, medication and safety lapses, facility disrepair, and alleged dishonesty or theft. Because both types of experiences are strongly represented, prospective residents and families should be cautious: verify the current staffing levels on the unit of interest, ask for recent inspection or complaint records, meet the specific members of the care team who will be responsible, and seek written plans for supervision, medication management, and infection control. For short-term rehab, many reviewers report excellent therapy and good outcomes; for long-term placement, concerns about staffing consistency, safety protocols, and facility condition merit careful consideration.
In summary, Crest Manor appears to deliver high-quality rehabilitation and outstanding individual staff performance in numerous cases, but systemic understaffing, maintenance deficits, administrative inconsistency, and several serious safety and neglect allegations create real risks. The center may be appropriate for some short-term rehab patients when therapy and social work are strong and staffing on the relevant unit is confirmed; however, families considering long-term placement should undertake heightened due diligence given the frequency and severity of negative reports.
