Overall sentiment across the reviews for Oak Grove Manor is highly mixed and polarized. Many reviewers praise individual caregivers, especially nurses, STNAs/aides, and the therapy/rehab team, describing them as dedicated, compassionate, and effective. At the same time a significant portion of reviews describe serious lapses in basic care and facility maintenance. The balance between strong praise for specific staff and acute criticism of systemic problems creates a pattern where experiences vary widely depending on wing, shift, and perhaps time period or management team.
Care quality shows a wide spectrum. Numerous reviews give high marks for nursing care, attentive staff, successful rehab outcomes, and respectful end-of-life care. Therapy is repeatedly singled out as a major strength — reviewers called the therapy staff "top-notch," credited them with effective short-term rehab and marked improvements in residents' conditions, and recommended Oak Grove for rehab services. Conversely, other reviews allege severe neglect: residents reportedly went without gowns for days, were not bathed for up to ten days, were left in wet clothes for hours, not assisted with toileting, and experienced ignored call lights. Specific examples like an unshaved beard, failure to shave a female resident, bedside commodes not emptied, and trash left in resident areas indicate both dignity and hygiene problems in some units. These serious allegations—if accurate—point to lapses in basic caregiving and oversight rather than isolated complaints.
Staffing and staffing culture is a central theme. Many reviewers explicitly cite understaffing and burnout as root causes of the poor outcomes they observed: aides being overworked, walking out, and staff shortages leading to missed baths, long waits for assistance, and slow call-light responses. At the same time, multiple reviews emphasize that individual aides and nurses do "above-and-beyond" work and that certain staff members (named in some reviews) provide excellent, compassionate care. This suggests that while some employees are highly committed, systemic staffing levels and morale issues undermine consistent quality. Comments about rude or unprofessional nurses, a DON accused of mistreatment, and upper management being dismissive further indicate tensions between frontline staff and leadership in some reviewers' experiences.
Facility, hygiene, and maintenance concerns are another recurring pattern with mixed reports. Several reviewers describe the building as bright, clean, and not smelly, with daily cleaning and a generally pleasant environment. Others report strong odors of urine and feces, dirty bedding, pest problems (bed bugs and bites), leaking windows, busted furniture, trash everywhere, and worn down infrastructure. Laundry failures (beds not changed for weeks, missed laundry), trash disposal problems, and unemptied bedside commodes are cited as concretely affecting resident comfort and health. Some reviews mention renovations and updates planned or underway, and some note improvements under new management, suggesting variability over time or across wings.
Dining and nutrition also show mixed feedback. Multiple reviews complain about missed meals, long waits, poor preparation (for example, soggy or improperly prepared items), and poor handling of dietary restrictions. Conversely, other reviewers report very good meals and dietary staff who are accommodating. There are also mentions of snacks being taken or not provided and inconsistent dietary service between shifts.
Management, communication, and accountability receive substantial criticism in numerous reviews. Common complaints include an unresponsive administrator, dismissive upper management, privacy violations, and failures to follow basic facility protocols. A few reviews mention complaints to the Ombudsman or that management lacks integrity. However, some reviews also describe positive interactions with admissions staff and note updates or new management that improved experiences. This dichotomy suggests that leadership quality may be uneven or changing over time, and that outcomes for residents are sensitive to the competence and responsiveness of managers on site.
Activities, transportation, and social aspects are generally positive where they are mentioned. Several reviewers appreciate outings, activities, and transport to doctor appointments, and many residents reportedly enjoy living there, find the staff like family, and have peace of mind. Still, concerns about lack of activities or limited recreational engagement were also cited in some reviews.
Safety, privacy, and infection control concerns appear in a number of reviews. Aside from the hygiene problems noted earlier, there are specific mentions of privacy violations and COVID-related visiting restrictions that affected family contact and caused distress. Pest infestation and bed bug reports further raise infection-control red flags that families should investigate.
Notable patterns and takeaways: the strongest, most consistent positive theme is the quality of individual caregivers and the therapy/rehab team — many reviewers explicitly recommend Oak Grove for rehab and praise particular staff members. The strongest negative themes are chronic understaffing, inconsistent basic care (hygiene and toileting), sanitation and pest issues, slow call response, and problematic management or leadership. Experiences appear highly variable: some wings or staff teams are described as clean, caring, and effective, while other accounts describe frightening neglect and unsanitary conditions.
For someone evaluating Oak Grove Manor, the reviews suggest doing a careful, current, and specific assessment: tour the specific wing where a loved one would reside, ask directly about staffing ratios, laundry and bathing schedules, pest-control history, lift and toileting assistance protocols, call-light response times, recent complaints to the Ombudsman, and what management changes (if any) have been made recently. In-person observation across different shifts and speaking to current families/residents will better reveal whether the positive testimonials about therapy and caring staff are representative of the facility overall or limited to particular units or timeframes. The recurring recommendation from reviewers is that Oak Grove has pockets of very good care and strong therapy, but systemic issues—particularly understaffing, hygiene, and administrative responsiveness—need to be confirmed resolved before entrusting long-term care to the facility.
