Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly polarized, with distinct clusters of very positive experiences and very negative experiences. A significant number of reviewers praise therapy services, specific caregivers, and parts of the facility environment, while an equally significant group reports serious problems with basic care, safety, staffing, and communication. This mix suggests that the facility delivers excellent outcomes for some patients — particularly where therapists and certain nursing/CNA staff are directly involved — but that those positive outcomes coexist with systemic operational issues that can produce substandard care for others.
Care quality and clinical concerns: Many reviews describe excellent therapy and recovery experiences, including effective physical therapy, pool therapy, outpatient PT, and individuals who aided successful transitions home. However, an opposing theme documents inconsistent or negligent clinical care: delayed or missing medications, delayed or absent pain management, long periods without therapy, falls with head injuries, choking risks, and alleged inappropriate clinical practices (for example, overly tight bandage wrappings and allegations of drugging). Several reviewers explicitly reported that residents were ‘rarely rehabbed’ or left in rooms for extended periods without appropriate care. These contrasting reports indicate wide variability in clinical performance depending on staffing, shift, and provider presence.
Staffing, responsiveness, and individual staff performance: Staffing shortages and unresponsive staff are among the most frequent complaints. Reported staffing ratios (for example, one nurse for 20+ patients) and delayed call-button responses contribute to perceptions of neglect and unsafe conditions. At the same time, multiple reviews call out specific caregivers by name for excellent care (notably CNAs like Priscilla and head nurse Julie) and describe compassionate, hardworking aides and therapists. This suggests there are pockets of strong, committed staff delivering good care, but coverage is inconsistent and often undermined by understaffing, uneven training, and managerial issues.
Facilities, safety, and maintenance: Comments about the physical plant are mixed. Some reviewers praise newer rehab buildings, cleanliness in parts of the facility, well-maintained areas, and a non-institutional atmosphere. Contrastingly, others report dirty rooms, filthy conditions, and maintenance hazards such as unsecured bed footboards and unsafe conditions on specific floors (Hathorn second floor cited). Serious safety concerns were raised including water near electronics, alleged OSHA violations, and general environment risks that could lead to electrical hazards. These divergent reports point to uneven facility upkeep and potential lapses in routine safety oversight.
Property security, belongings, and incident reports: Multiple reviewers reported missing personal items (dentures, clothing, shoes, cell phones) and at least one mention of robbery between patients. There are also allegations of items being misplaced or a bed assignment being given away. These reports, alongside claims of dishonesty from staff or supervisors, indicate problems with property control, recordkeeping, or both, and they amplify family concerns about resident safety and dignity.
Dining, activities, and infection control: Dining impressions are mixed — some reviews mention good food and active programming, while others describe food as cold, inadequate, or 'prison-like.' Activity programming receives praise in several positive reviews that describe an active, welcoming environment, especially in areas where staff engagement is strong. Infection-control and pandemic-era concerns appear in several reports: high COVID rates in rehab were noted, and unusual practices during COVID (e.g., dementia patients using private bathrooms) raised alarm for some families.
Communication, management, and culture: Communication and administrative responsiveness are recurrent issues. Families report hung-up calls, no callbacks, poor explanations, and unhelpful front-desk interactions (a named complaint about an admin assistant, Heidi). There are also reports of power-of-attorney disputes and families being 'kept in the dark' about care. Conversely, some reception staff and administrators are described as friendly and helpful by other reviewers. There are also reports alleging poor culture around supervision, dishonesty by supervisors, and race-relations concerns that suggest training and leadership gaps.
Overall recommendation and patterns: The reviews depict a facility with a bifurcated reputation. For patients who interact with engaged therapists and attentive CNAs/nurses, the facility can provide strong rehabilitation, compassionate care, and even life-changing outcomes. For other residents, especially when short-staffing, poor communication, or supervisory failures occur, experiences range from dissatisfaction to allegations of neglect, safety risks, and outright misconduct. Prospective residents and families should weigh these polarized accounts carefully: they should ask specific, recent questions about staffing levels, oversight, therapy schedules, infection-control practices, security for personal belongings, and named staff members. Visiting in person during different shifts and requesting references from recent families may help reveal whether a particular unit or shift demonstrates the consistent quality and safety they expect.
