Overall impression: Reviews for Sanctuary at Wilmington Place are highly polarized, with a mix of strongly positive experiences and numerous severe, safety-related complaints. Many reviewers praise specific staff members and departments — particularly therapy, some nurses and aides, housekeeping, laundry, social work, and admissions — and describe the facility as clean, well-maintained, and active. At the same time, a substantial portion of reviews allege serious lapses in clinical care, administrative responsiveness, and safety, with multiple reports of neglect, medication errors, infections, pressure injuries, falls, hospital readmissions, and at least one death attributed by a reviewer to facility care. These contrasting accounts suggest wide variability in quality depending on unit, shift, and individual staff working with residents.
Care quality and clinical issues: The most frequent and worrying themes in negative reviews concern clinical care failures. Reported problems include delayed or incorrect medication administration, failure to manage wounds or obtain cultures, inadequate infection control, missed wound dressings, ignored or undocumented conditions such as anemia, and prolonged delays in providing pain or bowel/bladder assistance. Several reviews connect these lapses to ER visits, hospital admissions, surgery, long antibiotic treatments, and a potential loss of limb. Pressure injuries, broken down heels, unexplained bruises, and other signs of physical neglect are reported multiple times. Positive clinical notes center on the therapy teams (PT/OT/ST), many of whom are described as proactive, thorough, and highly effective; however, multiple reviewers felt the skilled nursing side (SNF-level care) was not equipped for advanced needs.
Staffing, continuity, and communication: A recurrent pattern is inconsistency: first/day shift and therapy staff are often described as competent and caring, while night, evening, or certain nursing shifts are portrayed as understaffed, hurried, or inattentive. Reliance on agency nurses and reports of high turnover contribute to poor continuity of care and communication breakdowns between nurses and aides. Families cite long call-light response times, aides and nurses not communicating with each other, and lack of timely callbacks. Several reviewers state the acting Director of Nursing or DON is unhelpful, rude, or defensive. Administration is frequently described as unresponsive or retaliatory when concerns or complaints are raised, with a few reviewers alleging vindictive actions or threats rather than transparent investigation.
Rehabilitation and therapy: Therapy services receive the most consistent praise: many reviewers call therapy teams "awesome," "thorough," and a key reason for positive outcomes. Nevertheless, limits are noted — therapy may only be available during weekday mornings, and some reviewers felt the rehabilitation program was insufficient or inappropriate for higher-acuity patients, with inadequate intensity or post-discharge support leading to deterioration after discharge. Families considering the facility primarily for rehab should ask about hours, frequency, and post-discharge planning.
Facility, housekeeping, and amenities: Several reviewers describe the facility as very clean, with excellent housekeeping, an efficient laundry system, attractive grounds, large rooms with kitchenettes, and active social programming including bingo, card nights, ice cream parlor, and trips. Dining impressions are mixed: many reviewers describe meals as nutritious and delicious, while others describe poor food quality or issues with portion size and bite-size portions for those who need them. Transport reliability is called into question in a number of reviews. A small but serious subset of reviewers report hygiene concerns such as dirty floors and even bed bugs; these reports contrast with other reviewers who praise cleanliness, indicating inconsistent maintenance across rooms or times.
Management, safety, and legal/financial concerns: Management and administrative issues are central to many complaints. Reviewers report poor responsiveness to complaints, defensive or hostile attitudes, and in some cases alleged financial exploitation or excessive billing practices. Some reviewers explicitly call for regulatory intervention or closure, citing repeated safety and neglect incidents. These are serious allegations; while positive reviews praise admissions staff and some leadership, the volume and severity of negative reports about administration and DON conduct suggest families should investigate management responsiveness and complaint resolution processes before placement.
Patterns and recommendations for prospective families: The dominant pattern is inconsistency — some residents receive excellent, compassionate care and strong therapy services, while others experience lapses that range from neglectful to dangerous. Positive indicators include strong therapy staff, good housekeeping and laundry, active programming, and pleasant grounds. Red flags include chronic understaffing (especially at night), medication and wound-care errors, poor after-hours medical coverage, documented pressure injuries and infections, and defensive or unresponsive administration. Prospective residents and families should (1) ask specifically about staffing ratios by shift and use of agency staff, (2) inquire about wound care protocols, infection control, and after-hours medical coverage, (3) verify therapy hours and intensity if rehab is the primary need, (4) review recent state inspection reports and complaint histories, and (5) tour at different times (including evenings/nights) to evaluate staffing and responsiveness. Given the mixed but recurrently severe negative reports, caution is warranted for anyone needing high-acuity skilled nursing; families who choose this facility should obtain clear written plans for monitoring, communication, and escalation of clinical issues.
