Overall sentiment across the reviews is sharply polarized but leans negative when aggregated: there are repeated, specific accounts of serious care and safety failures alongside multiple reports praising individual staff and therapy outcomes. The most common positive themes are that some nurses, aides, and therapists are compassionate, communicative, and effective—families describe therapists who helped residents regain independence, housekeeping that kept rooms and grounds clean, and a small number of administrators and admissions staff who went above and beyond. Activities such as bingo and morning social time, a family-like atmosphere for some residents, and a convenient location were also noted as strengths in many reviews.
Conversely, the negative reports are frequent and often severe. A large portion of reviews describe chronic understaffing and overwhelmed aides, which reviewers link directly to neglectful care: prolonged incontinence episodes, saturated briefs or no briefs provided, overflowed catheter bags left for hours, and late or missed medications. Several reviewers reported explicit unsafe clinical practices — debris in catheter lines, patients discharged with active infections, and nurses or aides cleaning overflow with inadequate materials (e.g., a paper towel). These clinical safety issues are coupled with complaints of poor discharge planning and lack of family consultation, including a cited missed social worker discharge meeting and discharges that families felt were premature.
Management, communications, and operations are recurring pain points. Multiple reviews accuse administration of indifference or incompetence, failing to resolve ongoing problems, and not supporting floor staff. There are allegations of hidden or fake positive reviews posted by employees and assertions that management does not adequately investigate theft or address staffing shortages. Specific operational complaints include medication passes that are often late, room phones missing, roof and maintenance problems, and restrictions or misrepresentations about rehab that led to problematic hospital referrals. Some reviewers report discriminatory behavior by staff and inconsistent responsiveness from the office when relatives raise concerns.
Facility cleanliness and safety are inconsistent: while many reviewers praised clean rooms and helpful housekeeping, others reported mold/mildew smells, urine and feces odors, and general sanitation concerns. Safety concerns extend beyond hygiene—reports include witnessed theft of belongings, residents using drugs in parking areas, and at least one review mentioning police involvement. There are also claims of unprofessional behavior by staff, including “fake” nurses merely passing Tylenol and petty or uncaring nurses, which compounds family anxiety about resident wellbeing.
Despite the many criticisms, several detailed positive accounts show that care quality can be high depending on staffing, shifts, or particular departments. Multiple families explicitly said their loved ones received excellent care, with attentive, communicative staff and therapy teams that produced measurable improvements. These contrasting accounts suggest significant variability in resident experience — some units, shifts, or staff members perform well, while others fail to meet basic standards.
In summary, reviews paint a picture of a facility with notable strengths in individual staff dedication, therapy/recovery potential, and occasional strong management and housekeeping, but also with persistent systemic problems: staffing shortages, inconsistent care, safety and infection-control lapses, poor discharge communication, and concerns about theft and unprofessional conduct. The pattern is one of high variability—excellent experiences reported by some families coexist with alarming reports of neglect and unsafe clinical practice by others. Prospective residents or family members should treat these reviews as signaling the need for detailed, specific inquiries (staffing ratios, infection control protocols, discharge procedures, security, and on-shift supervision) and should seek recent, unit-specific information and direct observations before making placement decisions.
