Overall sentiment across the reviews for Tolstoy Foundation Rehabilitation & Nursing Center is highly polarized. A substantial portion of reviewers praise the facility for its compassionate front‑line caregivers, excellent rehabilitation services, and positive rehabilitation outcomes. These reviewers highlight a therapy department that is skilled, creative, and evidence‑based—examples include functional therapy goals, therapists who incorporate meaningful activities (piano playing to work on arm strength), and even accommodating measures like providing a takeout meal during a swallowing exam. Multiple families and residents report improved mobility, attentive nurses and aides, long‑tenured staff (25+ years), strong teamwork across departments, and smooth transitions from short‑term rehab to assisted living when applicable. Several reviews specifically mention professional, kind staff, well‑manicured grounds, pleasant views, clean rooms, and recreation programs that make residents feel engaged and treated like family.
Counterbalancing those positive reports are numerous and serious concerns raised by other reviewers. The most common negative themes are understaffing and inconsistent staffing—particularly on weekends and after hours—which reviewers say leads to slow or non‑existent call bell responses and lapses in basic care. Repeated complaints include urine‑soaked beds, soaked diapers left unattended, strong urine/vomit odors in parts of the facility, and other cleanliness issues. Several reviews describe alarming clinical and safety problems: wounds that were not reported or treated, falls not properly documented, postponed procedures, unclear infection status at discharge, and instructions or expectations that medical devices be removed before discharge. Some reviewers go further and allege abusive behavior or aggression from CNAs, nursing negligence, and a toxic workplace culture that affects resident care.
Dining and amenities receive mixed feedback. Some reviewers praise the food and the housekeeping/laundry staff; others call the meals repulsive and the facility older with small rooms. Activity and recreation programs are frequently cited positively—many residents enjoy the recreation staff and report cheerful days—yet the overall resident experience appears highly dependent on which unit, which shift, and which staff members are on duty. Operational and management issues appear in both positive and negative lights: a number of reviewers appreciate engaged management and responsive handling of medical records and discharge planning, while others allege misdocumentation, nepotism involving senior leadership, a planned facility closure, and management failures to address staffing and care concerns.
Patterns in the reviews suggest inconsistency across time and units rather than uniformly excellent or uniformly poor performance. When staffing is adequate and the rehabilitation/therapy team is involved, residents and families report strong clinical improvements and compassionate care. When staffing is thin or particular staff behaviors are problematic, reviewers report hygiene lapses, safety deficiencies, and even abusive interactions. Given these divergent accounts, the dominant takeaway is that Tolstoy Foundation Rehabilitation & Nursing Center has clear strengths in rehabilitation, therapy, and in the dedication of many individual staff members, but also has notable and recurring operational and clinical quality risks that some families experienced as severe.
For someone considering the facility, the reviews point to several practical inquiries to clarify current conditions: check current staffing levels (including weekend and after‑hours coverage), ask about infection control and wound care protocols, verify how call bell response times are monitored and addressed, tour rooms and common areas to assess cleanliness and odors, and speak directly with therapy leadership about individualized rehab plans. The experience appears highly dependent on specific caregivers and shifts, so multiple visits and candid conversations with management and clinical leaders will be important to assess whether the unit or timeframe under consideration consistently delivers the positive care outcomes many reviewers describe or suffers from the shortcomings others have reported.
