Overall sentiment in these reviews is highly mixed and polarized: multiple reviewers praise the staff, therapy and aspects of the environment, while a substantial number raise serious concerns about cleanliness, basic care, communication and management. Several family members describe a nurturing, family-like atmosphere with caring, hard-working staff, effective nursing involvement, good rehab outcomes and satisfactory meal service. At the same time, an overlapping set of reviews describes neglectful care, severe hygiene problems, pest sightings, and administrative issues — meaning prospective families may encounter either good care or troubling problems depending on timing, unit, or individual staff on duty.
Care quality and staffing show the sharpest divide. Positive reports emphasize attentive nurses, high-quality rehab/therapy and families who felt their loved ones were safe and well cared for. Conversely, many reviews describe ignored toileting needs, residents who appeared emaciated, failure to offer basic items such as water, and an overall sense of unresponsiveness from staff. Staffing is directly questioned by several reviewers — described alternately as “poorly staffed” or “out of control” — and some reviewers explicitly advised against placing parents there. There is also a recurring note that physical therapy is contracted out, which some reviewers cited as a negative for continuity of care while others reported excellent rehab outcomes; this suggests variability in therapy experiences.
Facilities, hygiene and infection/pest concerns are another prominent theme. Positive comments note clean, quiet and well-organized areas, but multiple negative accounts report substandard cleanliness, cigarette smoke odor in hallways, and even roaches in resident rooms. One review explicitly mentions health department involvement and another calls out the director of nursing (DON) as dishonest — these are serious allegations that appear in multiple negative summaries. The presence of these claims alongside positive reports suggests inconsistency in maintenance and infection-control practices across the building or over time.
Dining and activities receive mixed feedback. Some reviewers praised meal compliance for dietary plans and found meals satisfactory, while others described the food as unhealthy — heavy on fried and canned items with few fresh fruits. Activities and church services are noted positively by several reviewers, who cited inspiring services and engaging programming; distribution of cards or activity logistics were mentioned as minor operational criticisms by one reviewer.
Communication and management practices are another area of concern. Multiple reviewers report rude phone interactions, poor communication, negative first impressions at intake, and general unresponsiveness when trying to reach staff. At least one reviewer explicitly labeled interactions as disrespectful and urged others not to use the facility. Conversely, some families reported that staff were responsive to concerns and that the team helped families navigate the building and find rooms. This again points to inconsistency — some families experienced supportive, communicative staff while others felt ignored or mistreated.
Taken together, the reviews paint a facility with notable strengths — particularly in compassionate staff, effective rehabilitation for some residents, and meaningful activities — but also several significant and recurring problems: inconsistent cleanliness and possible pest issues, communication failures, variable basic-care practices, and management-related allegations. The pattern suggests variability across time, shifts, or units rather than uniformly excellent or uniformly poor performance.
For someone evaluating this facility, the reviews indicate it would be important to perform targeted due diligence: visit in person during different times of day, ask specifically about pest control and recent health department findings, review staffing levels and staff turnover, observe mealtimes and common areas for cleanliness and odor, meet the nursing leadership (including DON) and therapy providers (and whether PT is in-house or contracted), and request references from current families. The mix of strong positive reports and serious negative allegations warrants careful, on-site evaluation and verification of current conditions before making placement decisions.
