Overall sentiment across these reviews is highly polarized and inconsistent: there are clear pockets of solid clinical and rehabilitative care and individual staff praised for compassion and skill, yet a large number of reviews describe serious, systemic failures that put residents at risk. Many families report outstanding therapy outcomes, attentive individual caregivers, clean remodeled areas, and meaningful activity programs. Conversely, nearly as many comments describe understaffing, poor hygiene, medication mismanagement, safety incidents, thefts, and allegations of abuse and criminal behavior. This creates a two-tier narrative where the experience depends heavily on timing, unit, and specific staff present.
Care quality is a central theme with widely divergent accounts. Positive reports highlight excellent rehabilitation teams, wound healing, regained mobility, and skilled respiratory care (several reviewers single out a respiratory therapist named Diane). Those accounts describe responsive clinicians, timely therapy, and successful recoveries. However, numerous other reviews recount dangerous lapses: missed medications, medication delays or poor communication about meds, crushing pills that clogged feeding tubes and caused readmissions, overuse of antipsychotics or opioids (Haldol injections and morphine cited), presence of bedsores and deep wounds, and patients declining to the point of ICU transfer after stays. Several reviews explicitly warn that the facility is unsafe for frail elders, dementia patients, or ventilator-dependent residents.
Staff and interpersonal conduct show sharp contrasts. Multiple families praise caring, compassionate nurses, CNAs, activities staff, front desk, and housekeeping employees who go “above and beyond.” At the same time there are repeated allegations of abusive or unprofessional behavior — cursing CNAs, staff yelling at residents, rude and disrespectful office staff, staff drama and arguments, and even allegations of staff sexual relationships with residents and illicit drug administration. Staffing problems are recurrent: chronic understaffing, days with too few staff on duty, heavy reliance on agency or underqualified employees, and supervisors described as lazy or paycheck-driven. Reviewers also report serious issues with lost items, missing hearing aids and clothing, and alleged disappearance of resident funds, which undermine trust.
Facilities and cleanliness are reported inconsistently. Several reviewers praise recent remodeling, cleanliness, and a pleasant smell, and note bright, well-sized rooms and a nice courtyard. Other reviewers describe unsanitary conditions — urine and feces odors, dirty diapers in trash, dirty plates, bedbug reports, holes in walls, broken equipment, elevator delays, and a generally filthy appearance. Physical access issues (locked second floor, elevator delays) and maintenance problems were also noted. This variability suggests quality and cleanliness may be improving in places or on certain shifts, but remain unreliable overall.
Food and activities receive mixed feedback. The activities department is often described as friendly and engaging, and some reviewers appreciated the meals and specific items (mashed potatoes, good coffee). Yet many other reviewers complained about unhealthy, fatty food causing weight gain, terrible meals, or food not matching promised services. Grooming and basic personal care were also concerns in several reports (no on-site barber, neglected grooming, hygiene incidents).
Management, communication, and regulatory concerns are prominent. Some reviewers report dramatic improvements after new ownership and administration changes — citing better management responsiveness, ongoing staff training, a facelift/remodeling, and higher morale. However, many others describe unresponsive administrators and DONs, unanswered calls for days or years, failure to inform families about incidents, and slow or absent corrective action. Multiple reviewers described filing EMS or nursing board complaints or called for the facility to be shut down. This inconsistency in leadership and follow-through appears to be a major driver of the disparate experiences described.
Notable specific safety issues crop up repeatedly and merit attention: medication errors (including antipsychotic use and opioid management), pill crushing leading to feeding tube clogs and hospital readmissions, reports of sexual misconduct and illicit drug administration by staff, missing personal items and funds, bedsores and deep wounds, and poor dementia care culminating in screaming residents needing toileting help. There are also positive outliers in respiratory and rehabilitation care; several reviewers credited the respiratory therapist and therapy teams with saving or meaningfully improving lives.
In sum, reviews paint a facility with very uneven performance: when therapy and some staff are present the outcomes can be excellent, but there are frequent, serious reports of neglect, unsafe clinical practices, poor hygiene, theft, and management failings. For families considering this facility, the pattern suggests high variability by unit, shift, and management era — with improvement reported under new ownership by some, but persistent and severe concerns reported by many others. Prospective residents and families should seek recent, specific information about staffing ratios, medication management protocols, infection control, incident reporting, and how new administration has addressed the documented problems before making placement decisions.
