Overall sentiment across these reviews is highly mixed and polarized: several reviewers report compassionate, skilled, and communicative individual staff members and positive therapy and activity programs, while many others report systemic problems that raise safety and quality-of-care concerns.
Care quality and safety: Reviews indicate a split experience. On the positive side, multiple reviewers praise therapists for condition-specific exercises and rehabilitation work, and many families singled out individual caregivers (most notably a CNA named Alyssa) for prompt responses to call lights, strong communication with families, and going above and beyond. Conversely, a large portion of reviews raise serious safety concerns tied to understaffing: unanswered call bells, residents left in soiled clothing or wheelchairs, delayed medication delivery, alleged dehydration, and multiple reports describing traumatic incidents (falls shortly after admission, reports of delayed morphine for end-of-life comfort, and other severe allegations). Several reviewers describe outcomes they consider catastrophic; these reports are serious and recurring enough across summaries to be a major red flag. Many reviewers describe care as unpredictable — some residents receive attentive care while others experience neglect.
Staffing, training, and culture: A dominant theme is chronic understaffing and its downstream effects. Reviewers repeatedly link poor responsiveness, safety lapses, and rushed care (including hurried meals and inadequate assistance) to insufficient staffing. Multiple comments allege inexperienced or inadequately trained aides, specific incidents of rough or inattentive handling (including a report of being “thrown on the floor” on a first day), and numerous accounts of call lights not being answered. At the same time, many reviews celebrate particular staff members and social workers (including Marybeth Cameron) for compassion, advocacy, and effective communication. This contrast suggests a facility with dedicated individuals but inconsistent staffing policies, management, and staff training that produce variable resident experiences.
Administration, communication, and operations: Communication and administrative issues recur: unanswered phone calls, lack of timely incident reporting, and billing disputes (receipts contradicting emails, disagreement over accounts, and pressure toward auto-pay). Some reviewers describe policies enacted without clear family notification (confiscation of electrical items, denial of requested recliners) and problems with records/care plans being outdated or poorly maintained. There are reports of phone outages and locked front doors that complicated family access or contact. These operational shortcomings amplify family frustration and reduce confidence in accountability and transparency.
Facilities, dining, and activities: Comments about the physical environment and daily living are mixed. The bright atrium and family-friendly dining were praised by some families as pleasant spaces for visits. Activities staff receive frequent positive mentions for creative programming and welcoming family input, contributing to residents’ social-emotional well-being. However, other reviewers describe an institutional feel, building areas in need of repair, and spotty cleanliness (some reviews strongly negative about hygiene and odor). Dining experiences vary: some families appreciate interaction during meals and the dining space, while others report rushed service, limited variety, and unfriendly food-service staff.
Belongings, policies, and resident dignity: Repeated complaints about lost or mishandled clothing and personal items, including electronics, point to disorganization in tracking and storing resident belongings. Several reviewers describe confiscation of electrical items without prior notice and inconsistent return of personal items. There are also allegations of dignity-related lapses (residents left in soiled clothing, left screaming, or not assisted to bed). These patterns indicate weaknesses in property management and consistent resident-centered care practices.
Patterns and recommendations: The reviews paint a facility with notable strengths in individual staff members (therapists, social workers, and certain CNAs) and in aspects of social programming and family visitation spaces. However, systemic weaknesses — most prominently understaffing, inconsistent training, communication failures, and administrative disorganization — generate frequent and sometimes severe negative outcomes. The overall impression is one of significant variability by unit, shift, or individual caregiver: some families feel gratitude and relief, while others report traumatic experiences and safety concerns.
If considering Massena Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, prospective families should: ask specifically about current staffing levels (nurse-to-resident and CNA coverage on nights and weekends), medication administration protocols and incident reporting timelines, policies on personal belongings and electrical items, dementia-care staffing and care-plan updates, average therapy schedules, and how the facility addresses billing disputes and family communication. Inquire about turnover rates, staff training programs, and whether the Director of Nursing is regularly on the floor. Visiting at different times (weekend vs weekday, day vs night) to observe responsiveness, cleanliness, meal service, and activity engagement is advisable due to the inconsistent experiences reported. Finally, request references from families whose loved ones have similar care needs (e.g., dementia, post-acute rehab, end-of-life) to better gauge how the facility handles comparable situations.
