Overall sentiment is strongly mixed: many reviewers praise Falls River Village for its friendly, home-like atmosphere, attractive grounds, and staff who are kind and attentive, while a substantial number of reviews raise serious concerns about clinical care, staffing levels, leadership, safety, and communication. The pattern across reviews is one of stark inconsistency — some families describe an excellent, personal experience with clean facilities, good food, active programming, and helpful tour staff, while others report neglectful medical care, staffing crises, safety incidents, and poor management responses.
Care quality and clinical staffing are the most frequent and consequential concerns. Multiple reviewers describe chronic understaffing, insufficient medical attention, and clinical lapses (one reviewer reported a single med tech covering dozens of residents). Several accounts cite a deterioration in care following COVID-related closures, with reports of residents being sent to the hospital for routine infections, alleged inappropriate sedation practices, and examples of hygiene problems such as double diapering. There are also very serious allegations including resident injury (hip fracture), potential abuse, and at least one death mentioned in the reviews. At the same time, other reviewers say the non-medical caregiving staff are patient, caring, and supportive — indicating that the most acute problems appear centered on clinical staffing and oversight rather than universal day-to-day kindness.
Staff, culture, and management present a mixed picture. Positive comments repeatedly highlight individuals or teams who are compassionate, helpful during moves, or particularly good in tours or admissions. Several reviewers singled out staff who went “out of their way” and praised a supportive, small-community atmosphere where residents make friends. Conversely, reviewers also report high staff turnover, unprofessional behavior from some managers or memory care leadership, and staff who appear miserable or unsupported. Many families criticized communication — unreturned calls, no follow-up after incidents, and poor handling of refunds and complaints. Ownership changes and reported leadership departures (including a Director of Nursing no longer with the facility) were mentioned as factors contributing to instability.
Facilities, layout, and amenities receive generally positive remarks. The campus is often described as attractive: single-story, wide halls, multiple courtyards, a pleasant dining room, garden/mini-park spaces, beauty shop, and efficient laundry service. Apartments are described as satisfactory or comfortable by many, though some reviewers noted small rooms or mislabeling of unit types (1BR versus 2BR) and advised bringing your own furniture. Security features such as coded entries or an enclosed courtyard are mentioned positively, but several reviews also raise security and oversight concerns — particularly in memory care — creating a conflicting picture.
Dining and activities show variability. Numerous reviewers compliment the food, noting delicious meals, portion choices, and available snacks like ice cream. Others called meals bland or cited dining-room organization problems and food availability issues. The activities program receives both praise for its active calendar, flower arranging, shopping trips, and family-inclusive holidays, and criticism when scheduled activities did not happen or were run by overburdened CNAs. Transportation and outings are offered but not reliably; several reviewers reported broken-down buses or no transportation service for high-need residents (e.g., dialysis patients), which can be a major concern for families.
Safety, communication, and administrative issues are recurring themes that should give prospective families pause. Multiple reports of escapes from memory care without family notification, unattended wheelchairs, alleged misattribution of resident incidents, and inaction on infection control (including inconsistent mask use) suggest weaknesses in oversight and protocols. Families also reported problems with billing, unexpected fee increases, and poor responsiveness when seeking refunds or resolution of complaints. A few reviews referenced ownership or financial instability (bankruptcy/ownership change) and limited access to incident records (police records), which may complicate transparency.
In summary, Falls River Village appears to offer many elements families want — a small, community-oriented setting; attractive grounds and common areas; caring, friendly non-medical staff; and a generally pleasant dining and activities program for many residents. However, these positives are counterbalanced by significant and repeated concerns about clinical staffing, medical oversight, management responsiveness, safety in memory care, and inconsistent quality. The facility demonstrates a high degree of variability: some families report exemplary experiences, while others report serious lapses and adverse outcomes.
For families considering Falls River Village, it is essential to verify current clinical staffing ratios and med-tech coverage, ask for recent incident and staffing turnover data, clarify how memory care is secured and how escapes or elopements are handled, confirm transportation reliability, review the contract for fee increases and refund policies, and demand clear lines of communication and escalation. Touring the facility, speaking with multiple staff members (including nursing leadership), and seeking recent references from current residents’ families can help identify whether the experience will likely match the positive reviews or fall into the troubling patterns reported by other families.
