Overall sentiment in these reviews is deeply polarized: a substantial number of families and residents describe Brookhaven Retirement Community as a beautiful, well-appointed campus with compassionate staff, excellent therapy services, plentiful activities, and a comfortable country setting; yet an equally large and serious set of reviews reports systemic failures in direct care, safety, cleanliness, food service, and management oversight that have led to traumatic experiences and medical harm for residents.
Facilities and setting: Multiple reviewers praise the physical plant — remodeled buildings, large atriums and parlors, attractive grounds, walking paths, ponds and a peaceful country setting. Villas, cottages and one- to two-bedroom apartments with garages and roomy layouts are recurring positives. Housekeeping and common-area cleanliness were praised in many reports, though there are notable, contradictory accounts of filthy rooms, dirty linens, and unsanitary conditions in individual cases. This indicates that while the campus can be well maintained, cleanliness is inconsistent and may vary by unit or over time.
Staff and care quality: The most frequent theme is inconsistency in staff quality. Many reviewers speak glowingly of 'caring, kind and competent' nurses, aides and therapists — and of a top-notch rehab department that enabled some residents to return home. Conversely, numerous reviews allege severe neglect: long delays responding to call lights, failure to assist with toileting, leaving residents soiled, medication omissions or wrong medications, and even examples of mocking or disrespectful behavior by nurses. Several accounts describe life-threatening consequences (delirium from sepsis, brain bleed, rapid decline) that families attribute to delayed or inadequate care. These conflicting reports suggest pockets of excellent staff performance coexisting with frequent staffing shortages and staff training or supervision problems.
Staffing, supervision and safety: Understaffing is a persistent and central complaint. Reviewers repeatedly report insufficient aides and nurses on duty, which they connect to slow response times, missed care (bathing, feeding, hydration, toileting), falls, and wandering incidents. Memory support and nursing units are specifically flagged for safety lapses: residents attempting to leave unsupervised, falls, unconsented medication changes, and inadequate monitoring. Several families cite nurse charting or administrative tasks being prioritized over direct patient response. These staffing and supervision issues are presented as systemic rather than isolated, with reviewers describing a pattern of decline that often coincides with ownership changes or cost-cutting measures.
Dining and nutrition: Reports on food are mixed but lean negative. Some residents and families enjoyed meals, special catering, and perceived good variety. However, many more reviews criticize poor food quality and portioning — overcooked or mushy vegetables, misidentified menu items (smoked sausage as a hot dog), cold or small portions, running out of items, and posted menus not being followed. Several reviewers link cutbacks in dining to newer ownership and describe limited meal options (soup/sandwich or waffle) and restrictive meal practices.
Management, ownership and transparency: A recurring pattern is a perceived decline in service and staffing after a change in ownership. Families allege cost-cutting measures that reduce staff, degrade food service, and diminish overall care quality. Complaints about billing practices, lack of transparency on charges, and mishandling of personal belongings (items packed/discarded without consent, receipts required for replacements) appear multiple times. Several reviewers mention intentions to file complaints with state health departments or legal action; at least one referenced prior Department of Health complaints. These anecdotal regulatory and legal references strengthen concerns that some problems are systemic and recognized externally.
Specific safety and clinical failures: Beyond general understaffing and neglect, reviewers cite acute clinical failures: never receiving prescribed medications, wrong medications, untreated catheter issues, high ammonia levels, sepsis-induced delirium, and other serious outcomes. There are disturbing accounts of residents left without water or meals for days, rooms kept too hot (thermostat at 80°F), and inadequate post-hospital retrieval or UTI prevention protocols. An unusual but serious allegation involves an untrained dog living with or visiting patients and causing skin injuries to a resident. Memory care also receives focused criticism for falls, scratches, wet briefs, and unconsented medication changes.
Activities, social life and rehab: On the positive side, many reviewers praise the activity program, outings, social life and friendly atmosphere. Several accounts describe residents forming friendships, enjoying bingo, outings, card games, and appreciating an engaged activity staff. Rehabilitation and therapy receive strong positive mentions in many reviews for clinical competence and good outcomes.
Patterns and takeaways: The reviews paint a facility with strong assets — attractive campus, multiple care levels, skilled therapy staff, and meaningful activities — but also with recurring, serious operational failures: understaffing, inconsistent caregiver quality, safety and medication lapses, poor dining service, and management/ownership choices that some families believe prioritize cost savings over resident well-being. The variability is striking: one family’s 'top-notch therapy and caring staff' contrasts sharply with another’s account of neglect leading to medical harm. Several reviewers indicate the facility had a better reputation earlier and deteriorated following ownership changes.
Recommendation for prospective families: Because the reviews are so polarized and include reports of serious harm, anyone considering Brookhaven should perform thorough, specific due diligence. Ask for current staff-to-resident ratios by unit and shift, observe care during peak times (mealtimes, shift changes), verify medication administration processes, inspect actual resident rooms for cleanliness, ask about recent state citations or complaints, inquire about animal policies, and get references from current families in the specific unit of interest (memory care, assisted living, or skilled nursing). Clarify billing practices, what promises are contractually guaranteed, and how management handles incident reporting and family communication. The facility demonstrates clear strengths, but the documented consistency and severity of negative incidents warrant careful, specific questions and monitoring if placing a loved one there.
