Overall sentiment across the reviews for Lima Manor is mixed but leans strongly negative, with a small set of notably positive comments concentrated around therapy and some individual staff. Multiple reviewers report serious concerns about daily medical care and staff responsiveness, while several others praise the rehabilitation and wound-care services and a few staff members by name. This creates a pattern in which clinical therapy-related services may be a stronger point, but basic nursing care, medication safety, and hospitality aspects are repeatedly criticized.
Care quality and clinical safety are major themes. Several reviews explicitly cite medication administration errors and delays in medications, which represent significant patient safety issues. There are also complaints about restricted access to medical records, suggesting communication and transparency problems with clinical documentation. Some reviewers reported that staff appeared neglectful or unresponsive to resident needs; in extreme cases a family member felt compelled to call an ambulance. These specific incidents—medication problems, lack of access to records, and emergency transfers—are among the most serious and frequent concerns in the feedback.
Staff behavior and responsiveness are another consistent area of concern. Multiple summaries mention long call-button response times and staff ignoring call lights, creating a perception of unresponsiveness and neglect. There are reports of unprofessional conduct by nursing staff, including an incident where a nurse made an inappropriate joke about police/arrest. Conversely, some reviewers explicitly call staff "excellent," and a few single out individuals (for example, a staff member named Patty received praise). This indicates uneven staffing performance: some employees provide good care, but others undermine overall trust and satisfaction.
Rehabilitation services and wound care emerge as clear strengths in the reviews. Several summaries describe the therapy department as "excellent," cite effective wound care, and note frequent, structured therapy sessions. However, there are mixed perspectives even here: some reviewers view the therapy schedule as overly aggressive, and others say rehab was not delivered as prescribed. Thus, while therapy and wound care appear to be areas of competence for Lima Manor, there are also concerns about consistency and whether therapy always aligns with medical orders or resident tolerance.
Dining and hospitality are repeatedly criticized. Multiple reviewers describe the food as cold, disgusting, and offered in small portions. Combined with complaints about rude or lazy staff and "terrible service," these comments suggest problems with food preparation, meal delivery, and general resident satisfaction with daily living services. Overall facility management and oversight also come into question because of the combination of medication errors, restricted records, inconsistent staff behavior, and dining issues—patterns that point to systemic problems rather than isolated incidents.
In summary, the review set presents a facility with clear strengths in therapy and wound care but significant, recurring weaknesses in medication safety, staff responsiveness, professionalism, and dining services. The experience appears highly variable: some families and residents had positive interactions and felt well cared for, while others describe neglectful practices that they perceived as endangering residents. Anyone evaluating Lima Manor should weigh the strong therapy capabilities against the documented safety and responsiveness concerns, ask specific questions about medication administration policies, call-button response times, staff training and turnover, access to medical records, and meal service standards, and try to speak directly with both clinical and administrative staff and current residents/families to assess consistency before making placement decisions.
