The reviews for Gowanda Rehabilitation & Nursing Center are highly polarized, revealing a facility with notable strengths in therapy and some compassionate frontline caregivers, but also with recurring, serious concerns about safety, consistency, leadership, and basic care. Positive reviews frequently highlight excellent PT/OT services, skilled nurses and CNAs, and admissions staff who are professional and caring. Several families describe meaningful improvements in mobility and health during rehab stays, successful surgical recoveries (for example knee replacements), and relationships with long‑tenured staff who provide a welcoming, family-like environment. When the facility performs well, reviewers report friendly, attentive staff, varied activities, a clean environment, and comfort food that contributes to residents’ wellbeing.
However, a substantial number of reviews describe troubling lapses in basic care and safety. Multiple reviewers reported delayed responses to call bells, residents left in urine, delayed assistance with lifts (Hoyer), and equipment or infection‑control issues such as nebulizer masks on the floor and unaddressed infections. There are repeated accounts of short‑staffing and staff being unable to manage complex medical needs (including ventilator-related concerns), all of which in several reports contributed to hospital transfers, ICU incidents, and even deaths. Medication mistakes, reports of bedsores, and hygiene failures (missed showers, being washed in bed) are among the most serious patterns flagged by reviewers.
Administration and communication emerge as another prominent theme. Some reviewers praise an approachable admissions team and at least one administrator who listens, but an equal or larger set of reviews describe an unresponsive, dismissive or cold leadership, poor follow‑through, and inadequate accountability. Families report being given the run‑around, experiencing inconsistent or nonexistent updates, and in a few cases not being contacted at all during critical incidents. There are also specific complaints about unprofessional supervisory behavior, misrepresentation of aides, lost belongings, and private‑payer related concerns, suggesting the experience may vary by payer status or unit.
Dining, cleanliness, and the physical environment receive mixed marks. A number of reviews mention daily cooked meals and comfort food, while others call the food terrible, deny requested meal supplements, or note minimal and unappetizing options (e.g., Dixie cup snacks cited positively by one reviewer but not a substitute for meals). Cleanliness is likewise inconsistent: several people describe a clean, well‑maintained facility, while others report dirty areas, maintenance issues (including dog feces on the front walk), lice, and an overall drabby, depressing atmosphere. These conflicting reports reinforce the impression of variable standards across the facility.
Therapy and rehabilitation are among the facility’s strongest, most consistently praised services. Multiple reviewers explicitly credit the PT/OT teams with significant, measurable improvements and fast recovery timelines. For families seeking rehab-focused care, these positive accounts indicate a real capability in restorative therapy. At the same time, some reviewers complained about minimal PT or ineffective rehabilitation, again pointing to variability across units or time periods.
Taken together, the reviews portray a facility where outcomes can range from excellent, compassionate rehab and nursing care to dangerous neglect and mismanagement. This inconsistency appears to be the central issue: when staffing, communication, and leadership align positively, residents and families report high satisfaction; where those systems break down, the consequences are serious and sometimes catastrophic. For prospective residents and families, recommended actions based on the review patterns include: visiting in person across multiple shifts, asking specific questions about staffing ratios and clinical capabilities (ventilator care, Hoyer lift procedure, infection control), confirming how the facility communicates with families, checking how private‑pay residents are handled, and monitoring basic hygiene, medication administration, and response times closely. Reporting concerns promptly to management and the state survey agency is also supported by several reviewers’ experiences.
In summary, Gowanda Rehabilitation & Nursing Center shows clear strengths, especially in therapy and in pockets of dedicated nursing staff, but the facility also demonstrates recurrent, serious problems with consistency, safety, communication, and leadership. Families should weigh the positive reports of effective rehab and caring clinicians against the documented risks of neglect and poor management, and proceed with careful oversight if choosing this facility.
