The reviews for Avenue at Macedonia Care and Rehabilitation Center reflect a highly polarized set of experiences, with a consistent pattern: the physical plant and selected teams earn high praise, while serious operational and care delivery problems are repeatedly reported by other families. On the positive side, many reviewers describe a modern, hotel-like facility that is clean, well-maintained, and offers private, roomy rooms. Admission experiences are frequently noted as welcoming and professional, with several admissions and administrative staff singled out by name for exceptional support. The rehabilitation and therapy team is another area of strength for many residents: the therapy room, staff engagement, and positive recovery outcomes appear repeatedly across positive reviews. Activities programming, laundry service, reception staff, and hospice collaboration were also commended, and multiple families reported quick recoveries or successful transitions facilitated by caring, responsive teams.
Despite those strengths, a substantial and troubling set of negative reports appears in many summaries. The dominant concern is staffing: reviewers describe chronic shortages, high turnover, and understaffed shifts. Those shortages seem to translate into inconsistent and sometimes negligent nursing and aide care. Specific allegations include residents left in urine or feces for hours, not being bathed, not being fed or assisted to drink, delays answering call lights, and basic supply or equipment delays (for example, delayed bed rails or bedpans). Several reports describe medication timing errors, lost medications, and concerns that residents were kept longer than appropriate for financial reasons. In the most severe accounts, these failures allegedly led to medical deterioration such as pneumonia, ICU admissions, near-death events, and hospice placements. A number of families reported filing complaints with ombudsmen or considering legal action.
Communication and management responsiveness show a split pattern. Many reviewers praise individual administrators and managers — mentioning responsiveness, clear communication, and hands-on leadership — while other reviewers describe uninterested or unresponsive administration, delayed callbacks, poor follow-up from admissions, and a perception that complaints are ignored. This inconsistency suggests that resident experiences may heavily depend on which staff are on duty and the particular unit or shift. Similarly, the quality of housekeeping and room maintenance receives mixed feedback: several reviewers celebrate a tidy, sanitary environment, while others cite untrained janitorial staff, dirty room floors, waste baskets not emptied, and missing or stolen items from rooms.
Dining and nutrition are recurring pain points. Numerous reviews mention cold, limited, or unappetizing food and diet mismanagement leading to weight loss in some residents. In contrast, a subset of families did not report issues with dining. Financial and care-delivery inconsistencies are also highlighted: some families state they were billed or had insurance charged for services (notably daily rehab) that were not consistently provided. Privacy concerns such as staff not knocking were mentioned alongside poor internet access in some rooms.
Taken together, the reviews paint a facility with strong assets and significant liabilities. The building, therapy program, activities, and particular staff members and leaders draw repeated praise and indicate the facility's capacity to provide high-quality, compassionate care. However, recurring reports of understaffing, neglectful incidents, serious medical oversights, communication breakdowns, and inconsistent management response are serious red flags. These patterns suggest variability in care quality across units and shifts rather than uniform performance across the organization.
For prospective residents and families this means due diligence is especially important. Helpful areas to probe during a tour or pre-admission meeting include: current staffing ratios for the specific unit and shifts, turnover rates, documented incident and complaint resolution processes, routines for call-light response and toileting assistance, medication administration and reconciliation practices, frequency and scheduling of therapy sessions, dietary accommodations and monitoring for weight loss, laundry and housekeeping procedures, and the facility's track record with the state survey or ombudsman complaints. It may also be valuable to request references from recent families who had similar care needs (short-term rehab, long-term skilled nursing, memory care), and to identify specific staff leads (therapy director, unit nurse manager, administrator) who will be directly involved in the resident's care.
In summary, Avenue at Macedonia appears capable of delivering excellent rehabilitation and hospitality-style accommodations when the right staff and leadership are in place, but it also shows recurring and serious operational problems that have led to neglect and harm in multiple reports. Families should weigh the facility's clear strengths in environment, therapy, and some compassionate staff against documented risks from inconsistent staffing and oversight. Ongoing oversight, transparent answers from management, and confirmation of safeguards and staffing levels are recommended before making placement decisions.
