Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized: many families and residents report excellent rehabilitation outcomes, compassionate individual caregivers, and a clean, attractive facility, while a substantial number of reviews recount serious lapses in basic care, safety concerns, and management failures. The most consistently praised area is the rehabilitation program (physical, occupational, speech therapy) — reviewers frequently credit the therapy teams with meaningful functional gains, successful discharges home, and individualized therapy plans. Likewise, multiple clinicians are singled out by name for outstanding bedside care (nurses, CNAs, respiratory therapists, social workers), and recreational staff receive repeated praise for engaging activities that improve residents’ quality of life.
However, the positive clinical and environmental reports sit alongside frequent and troubling allegations of neglect and unsafe practices. A dominant theme is chronic understaffing — especially nights and weekends — which reviewers link to long waits for bathroom assistance, delayed medication or treatments, skipped feedings, and inadequate supervision that led to falls, pressure ulcers, and worsening medical conditions. Many families described residents left in soiled diapers for hours, long delays (reported between 9–18 hours in some accounts) for necessary care tasks, and shortages of basic supplies such as diapers, pads, linens, and wound supplies. These operational problems produced life-threatening outcomes in some accounts (sepsis, untreated bleeding, feeding tube dislodgement) and contributed to transfers back to hospitals.
Several reviews call out specific quality and safety failures: medication errors (wrong medicine or missed doses), medication diversion/theft, untrained staff handling ventilators or tracheostomies, abrupt medication changes, and insufficient infection control (reports of C. difficile, poor hand hygiene, and facility outbreaks). There are also multiple, credible-sounding reports of physical mistreatment or harsh verbal interactions (staff scolding residents during accidents, rough handling, or derogatory behavior), which exacerbate concerns about staff professionalism and supervision. Property loss (laundry, jewelry, mail) and allegations of theft were raised repeatedly and erode trust for many families.
Facility and amenities receive mixed reactions. The building and common areas are frequently described as modern, bright, and well-maintained with pleasant gardens and large windows; these aspects contribute positively to admissions impressions and support a therapeutic setting. Conversely, maintenance and environmental problems are also reported (mold, torn ceilings, heating/AC issues), suggesting variability between units or over time. Dining is another split area: while some reviewers praised attractive meals and good dining experiences, many more criticized the food as poor quality, cold, low in nutrition, or inappropriate for medically vulnerable residents (e.g., pureed meals described as unsatisfactory).
Management, communication, and administrative themes are also mixed. Multiple reviewers praised specific administrative staff and social workers for clear communication, advocacy, and discharge coordination. At the same time, many complaints cite poor communication about clinical status, billing discrepancies, lack of follow-up after incidents, and a perception that management prioritizes revenue over patient care. Weekend and night shift leadership appear weaker or absent in many accounts, which compounds clinical risk during those periods. A few reviews accused the organization of pressuring staff to post positive reviews or engaging in misleading public messaging; while these claims are not universally echoed, they contribute to a sense of inconsistent transparency.
Patterns and practical takeaways: Affinity Skilled Living and Rehabilitation appears to offer a strong rehabilitation program and benefits from a welcoming, well-appointed environment with several highly committed staff members who provide excellent individual care. For short-term rehab patients seeking intensive PT/OT/ST, many families reported successful recoveries. However, for longer-term stays or medically complex patients who require consistent nursing care, wound management, or high-dependency monitoring (vent/trach), there are recurring reports of unsafe staffing levels, supply issues, and lapses in clinical oversight. Prospective residents and families should carefully evaluate the specific unit, ask about staffing ratios (days/nights/weekends), verify wound/infection control protocols, check how the facility handles medication safety and property tracking, and request names and roles of key clinical leads. Visiting at different times (nights/weekends) and talking with current families can help gauge consistency. Finally, the large number of polarized reviews suggests that experience at Affinity can vary dramatically depending on unit, shift, and individual staff — meaning careful due diligence is essential before committing to long-term placement.
