Overall sentiment is highly mixed and polarized: reviews range from glowing accounts of compassionate, skilled rehabilitation and attentive staff to serious allegations of neglect, safety violations, and poor management. Multiple reviewers report outstanding short-term rehab outcomes—effective physical and occupational therapy, attentive therapists, and patients discharged stronger or walking unaided. These positive accounts frequently highlight individual staff members, a welcoming and home-like environment, a clean and bright facility, good housekeeping, a supportive activities program (when staffed), and strong communication with families.
Conversely, a substantial portion of reviews describe systemic problems that materially affect patient safety and dignity. The most consistent negative themes are chronic understaffing and slow or nonexistent responses to call bells. Several reviewers describe patients being left in urine- or feces-soaked briefs until bedsores develop, bedpans left unattended for long periods, and overall neglectful assistance with bathing and dressing. These accounts are often coupled with reports of unsanitary rooms, foul odors, pest sightings (cockroaches), sticky floors, and poor infection control practices. Some reviewers attributed delays in treatment or ambulance response to deterioration and hospitalizations.
Medication and clinical management issues recur as well. Reports include medication errors, overmedication or visible overmedicated-looking residents, misuse of patient supplies, and at least one allegation of staff attempting to administer narcotics against family instructions. There are also allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct by staff and theft of personal items—claims that raise serious safety and oversight concerns. A few reviewers go further, alleging misrepresentation by doctors, price gouging, and blocking access to outside physicians in favor of in-house care, which they say led to poor outcomes.
Staff performance and culture appear inconsistent across shifts and units. Many reviewers praise certain nurses, CNAs, therapists, and administrators as compassionate, professional, and effective—citing prompt responses, excellent therapy regimens, spiritual/emotional support, and thoughtful family communication. Others report inattentive or neglectful staff, unresponsive night staff, rude office personnel, and management that is perceived as incompetent or uninterested in corrective action. High staff turnover, departures of key personnel (e.g., activities director), and periodic understaffing are mentioned as drivers of variability in care and declining quality over time.
Dining and activities are another area of divergence. Some families praise the kitchen staff as accommodating and the food as satisfactory; others recount cold meals, sour milk, and poor overall food quality. Activities and engagement are valued when present—positive mentions of a strong activities director and meaningful crafts and memory-unit programming occur—but several reviewers note that activities dwindled or disappeared when staff left, leaving residents with little to do.
Facility attributes are frequently described as bright, clean, and attractive by many reviewers, and several explicitly recommend the facility for short-term rehabilitation stays. There are also several more severe critiques describing unsanitary conditions, pest presence, and safety violations; some reviewers claim critical incidents and even deaths, suggesting that oversight and regulatory compliance may be uneven. External events (e.g., hurricane Florence) and COVID lockdowns are mentioned as complicating factors in some cases, which may have contributed to staffing and operational challenges.
In summary, Bolivia Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center presents a split picture. It can deliver excellent, compassionate rehabilitation care and has staff who are deeply appreciated by families; the facility itself is often described as clean and welcoming. However, recurring and serious complaints—particularly around staffing shortages, delayed responses to call bells, neglectful incontinence care, medication safety problems, sanitation/pest issues, and inconsistent management—are frequent enough to be a major concern. Prospective residents and families should weigh the strong positive reports of therapy and some staff against the significant and specific negative allegations. If considering this facility, follow-up recommendations based on the reviews include: ask about current staffing levels and turnover, inquire about call-bell response times and incontinence/skin-care protocols, request documentation of infection-control and pest-management measures, verify medication administration safeguards, and seek references from recent short-term rehab patients. Additionally, confirm how the facility handles outside physician access, emergency response procedures, and complaint escalation/management to better assess current operational reliability.
