Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly mixed and polarized: several reviewers strongly recommend Islip Pearl Garden Manor, praising hands-on ownership, welcoming tours, and staff who appear caring and responsive, while other reviewers report serious concerns including unprofessional behavior, pest infestations, and misleading advertising. The pattern is one of inconsistent experience — some families describe a warm, home-like environment with happy residents and attentive management, whereas other families experienced conditions they found unacceptable.
Care quality and staff: Many positive comments center on staff demeanor and involvement. Multiple reviewers described staff as nice, polite, and attentive; one review specifically notes that staff addressed a problem, and others report that residents (and in one case a parent) seem happy. Several reviews highlight hands-on ownership and a manager or owner who personally greets prospective families and explains levels of care, which left a strong positive impression. However, other reviews contradict this picture, alleging rude or unprofessional management behavior, including the use of profanity on a daily basis. This split suggests variability in staff behavior or differences in individual interactions; families may experience different staff or shifts with differing levels of professionalism.
Management and operations: Hands-on ownership and an owner who gives welcoming tours and explanations are recurring positives. These reviews praise management accessibility and recommend the facility on that basis. Conversely, there are serious criticisms directed at management in other reviews — specifically accusations of rudeness, unprofessional conduct, and misleading representations of the facility (fake pictures/advertising). The coexistence of both strong praise and strong criticism indicates operational inconsistency or changes over time; it raises a flag to verify current management practices, ask about turnover, and confirm claims during an in-person visit.
Facilities, cleanliness, and safety: Several reviews raise red flags about the physical condition and cleanliness of the facility. Specific allegations include run-down facilities, descriptions of the place as "disgusting," and explicit reports of pests (bed bugs and roaches). These are significant concerns because they relate directly to resident comfort and health. At the same time, other reviewers described the building as a "beautiful Victorian home," which suggests at least some areas or units retain appealing architectural character. The contrast here reinforces the broader theme of inconsistency: appearance and maintenance may vary by area, time, or unit. Any prospective family should seek current evidence (recent inspection reports, pest-control records) and do a walk-through at different times of day.
Dining, atmosphere, and activities: Few reviews explicitly discuss dining or activities; one reviewer mentions "not great food," which is a negative datapoint but not widely echoed. Positive mentions center more on the social atmosphere — residents being welcoming and some family members reporting that their loved ones "love it" — indicating that there can be a warm community environment. The lack of frequent comments about activities suggests either that activities are unremarkable or that reviewers focused their feedback on other issues (staff and facility condition).
Notable patterns and implications: The dominant pattern is inconsistency. Multiple strong positive reviews (personal attention from ownership, friendly staff, happy residents) sit alongside several very negative reviews (pests, unprofessional behavior, misleading advertising). This divergence could result from changes over time, variable staffing shifts, different wings/rooms with different conditions, or subjective differences between families. Because the negative reports include objective claims (bed bugs, roaches, misleading photos) as well as subjective ones (rudeness, not feeling like home), both types warrant verification.
Recommendation for prospective families: Given the polarized feedback, prospective residents and their families should perform targeted due diligence: visit in person (including unannounced visits if possible), tour multiple parts of the building at different times, meet current residents and staff, ask for recent health inspection and pest control records, request references from current families, and confirm how management handles complaints and staff conduct. The facility has the potential to provide a caring, home-like environment under engaged ownership and polite staff, but the reports of serious cleanliness and professionalism issues are significant and should be investigated before making a placement decision.
