Overall sentiment is highly polarized, with a large number of reviews praising individual staff members, therapy services, and certain aspects of the facility while a similarly large subset of reviews details serious concerns about neglect, abuse, and mismanagement. Many reviewers describe life-changing rehabilitation, compassionate aides and nurses, and improvements tied to renovations or new management. At the same time, other reviewers report episodic or ongoing safety and care failures — often severe — including alleged theft, medication mismanagement, missed basic hygiene, and poor fall follow-up. This pattern suggests significant variability in resident experience depending on shift, unit, or which staff members are on duty.
Care quality: The reviews exhibit a stark contrast. A number of family members and residents praise the nursing and therapy teams—particularly physical therapists—and credit them with strong recovery outcomes and attentive, individualized care. Multiple reviews explicitly call out excellent rehabilitation services and named staff who were especially helpful. Conversely, many reviews recount neglectful care: missed showers, unchanged briefs, residents being starved or losing significant weight, long call-light delays, and staff who appear uncaring or abusive. There are repeated allegations about medication problems (delays, withheld meds, missing medications, pill organizers kept by staff) and even serious claims that medications were diverted for staff use. Several reports describe falls that were not properly followed up with imaging or doctor visits. These care-related issues are among the most serious and most frequently cited negative themes.
Staff and staffing: Staffing inconsistency is a dominant theme. Numerous reviews mention short staffing and reliance on agency personnel; reviewers attribute many quality and safety lapses to staffing shortages. At the same time, many reviewers single out "star" nurses, aides, and administrators who provide compassionate service and go above and beyond. This split creates a highly variable environment where the resident experience appears to depend greatly on which caregivers are present. Additional staff-related concerns include alleged theft of resident belongings and medications, unprofessional behavior (rude during visits or at night), staff smoking in resident rooms, and lack of background-check transparency in some reports.
Management and communication: Several reviewers praise specific administrators (notably one named Chris) and report improved conditions with new management. Other reviews, however, describe management as unhelpful, rude, defensive, or nonresponsive, and specifically criticize a named DON (Misty) for poor communication. Common communication problems include unanswered phone calls, calls disconnecting after many rings, lack of follow-up with families after incidents (falls or health declines), billing challenges, and social services being described as ineffective. Where management intervened promptly and constructively, reviewers reported positive outcomes; where they did not, reviews escalate to calls for oversight or closure.
Facilities and cleanliness: Reports about the physical plant are mixed. Several reviewers applaud ongoing renovations, modernized interiors, and a clean, odor-free environment with an elegant dining area. Others report extremely dirty conditions, overwhelming odors, outdated or cramped rooms, and previously unacceptable levels of cleanliness. Renovation and maintenance appear to be in progress in multiple accounts, which may explain divergent impressions between earlier and later reviewers.
Dining and nutrition: Dining impressions are inconsistent. Some reviewers report delicious food, an elegant dining room, and staff who accommodate dietary needs; others complain of awful food, residents being served items to which they are allergic, and instances of inadequate feeding or encouragement leading to weight loss. Several reviews mention improvements in food service tied to a single supplier constraint or gradual changes, suggesting variability over time or between units.
Safety and dignity: Multiple reviews raise very serious safety and dignity concerns: lack of privacy (doctors discussing roommate issues openly), prison-like lockdowns or overly restrictive practices, missing visitor logs and a near-accident involving a visitor where staff reacted poorly, bed alarm absence, and poor dementia care (insufficient Alzheimer’s-specific training and inappropriate use of sedative medications). Some reviewers explicitly say the facility should be shut down or that oversight has failed, while others find the environment warm, home-like, and respectful.
Activities and community life: There are many positive notes about activities—live music, weekly services, social programs, and daily activities for socialization. Several reviewers highlight a welcoming, family-oriented atmosphere, holiday or weekly events, and staff-led programs that make residents comfortable and engaged. This is an area of strength for reviewers who felt the facility provided good quality-of-life opportunities.
Patterns and notable specifics: The reviews collectively point to significant variability across time and staff. Positive reviews frequently reference compassionate individual staff members, effective therapy, clean renovated spaces, and good activities. Negative reviews cluster around core care and safety failures—missed hygiene, medication and theft allegations, poor fall management, weight loss, and inconsistent communication from management. Several named positives (Chris, Nayddan, Gladys) are contrasted by named criticisms (DON Misty). Allegations of medication diversion and abuse are serious and recur in some summaries; those reports should be treated as claims that warrant investigation rather than verified facts.
Bottom line: The aggregated reviews indicate that Sunrise Manor Nursing and Rehabilitation offers excellent care and rehabilitation experiences for many residents, driven by committed staff and improving facilities, but there are also multiple, repeated reports of severe lapses in care, safety, and management. Prospective residents and families should weigh the mixed feedback carefully: visit multiple times across different days and shifts, meet specific caregivers and therapists, ask about staffing levels, fall-prevention protocols, medication administration policies, background checks, and recent inspection or complaint history. Families should request clear communication plans and named contacts for concerns, and be vigilant about monitoring weight, medications, hygiene care, and follow-up after falls. If decision-makers observe any of the serious problems reported in the negative reviews (medication diversion, theft, repeated neglect, or lack of necessary medical follow-up), they should escalate to state regulators or ombudsman services immediately.
