Overall sentiment is mixed, with a clear split between reviewers who praise the staff, activities, and social environment and those who report systemic problems with management, fees, and the ability to meet higher-care needs. Many reviewers highlight positive daily experiences — good meals, frequent activities that increase socialization, and individual care staff (CNAs and medication techs) who are described as caring and patient, especially with residents who have dementia. Several families said their loved ones became more social and enjoyed the programming, and some explicitly recommend the community.
However, significant and recurring concerns center on management, policies, and care suitability. Multiple reviewers describe an unfriendly, rigid, or even snobbish administrative demeanor; at least one family felt an administrator told their loved one they "belong in a nursing home," which contributed to a perception that the community is unwilling or unable to accommodate residents with increasing care needs. Administration is also described as difficult to work with and inflexible, and there are reports of abrupt departures or transfers out of the community due to these issues.
Financial transparency and restrictive policies are another major theme. Reviewers report extra monthly charges explicitly: $500 per month for incontinence and $800 per month for monitoring. The community's monitoring practice is described as 24-hour checks every 30 minutes, which some families found intrusive or indicative of an inappropriate care model for residents who require more assistance. These fees and monitoring practices contributed to dissatisfaction and, in at least one case, a move to another community.
Care quality appears inconsistent and seems to vary by resident needs and staff capacity. While many reviews commend individual caregivers (CNAs and Med Techs) for trying their best, other comments indicate staff are overworked and the facility is poorly managed, resulting in poorer care for residents who need more assistance. Several reviewers explicitly state the community is not suitable for those who need significant help, suggesting it functions better for more independent assisted-living residents than for those with higher medical or ADL needs.
Comments about the physical environment are mixed. Some reviewers call the facility clean and well-kept, while others describe it as sterile, old, or "icky," and note an overpowering cleaner/chemical smell. Noise issues such as a loud pager are also mentioned, which can affect comfort and quality of life for residents. On the positive side, activities and meals receive repeated praise, and social outcomes (residents making friends, increased engagement) are strong selling points cited by satisfied families.
In summary, The Kempton At Brightmore receives praise for its day-to-day living aspects — meals, activities, and many compassionate direct-care staff — and can be a very positive environment for residents who are relatively independent or have moderate needs. Persistent complaints focus on administration style and policies, opaque extra fees, frequent 30-minute monitoring, inconsistent care for higher-need residents, and indicators of poor management and staff overload. Prospective residents and families should weigh the strong social and activity programs and individual caregiver efforts against the risk of management-related problems, additional monthly charges, and potentially inadequate support for those requiring significant assistance. If a resident is likely to need increased medical or personal care over time, families should probe management policies, fee structures (including the $500 incontinence and $800 monitoring charges), monitoring protocols, and expected staffing levels before deciding.
