Overall impression: The reviews for Hawthorn Glen Senior Living Campus are predominantly positive, centering on a clean, well-kept campus with an active, engaging community and many staff members who are described as compassionate, skilled, and attentive. Reviewers consistently praise the facility’s appearance — odor-free interiors, beautiful grounds, ponds and water features, and inviting, home-like decor — as well as a robust activities program that keeps residents socially engaged through bingo, concerts, grill-outs, dog shows, outings and family events. The community atmosphere is frequently described as communal and family-like, and multiple families report feeling peace of mind and satisfaction with the care their loved ones received.
Care quality and clinical services: Many reviews highlight strong clinical and rehabilitative services. The therapy department and nursing teams receive repeated commendations, with specific examples of residents regaining independence (walking with a walker, feeding and communicating) after therapy. Hospice services are described as supportive and caring. Memory care is commonly noted as a strength: reviewers mention a small dementia unit, odor-free dementia areas, and a generally safe environment for residents with cognitive impairment. Several reviews also report that the skilled care section is good and undergoing room updates or remodeling, suggesting investment in clinical areas.
Staffing, responsiveness, and named staff: A large portion of the positive sentiment centers on individual staff members and teams — admissions staff (Tessha), standout caregivers (Jo’Nate), activity directors, maintenance, and many nurses and aides are singled out for going above and beyond. Maintenance is repeatedly praised for responsiveness and willingness to help. At the same time, a recurrent concern is staffing levels and turnover: multiple reviewers cite understaffing, slow responses to call lights, and limited direct personal care, especially on certain shifts. There are also mentions that some aides may not be state-tested. These operational gaps appear to produce inconsistent experiences — where some guests see exceptional, attentive care, others report delays or unmet personal-care needs.
Serious negative incidents and safety concerns: While many reviews are highly favorable, there are isolated but serious complaints that cannot be overlooked. A few reviewers reported extremely troubling incidents: alleged neglect (patients left without bathroom assistance on third shift), bed bug detection, improper documentation of resident files, failure of staff to recognize a stroke, and reports of staff unresponsiveness leading to unsafe situations. These accounts are in stark contrast to the majority of positive feedback and suggest that quality and safety may vary by unit, shift, or staff present on a given day. Several reviewers explicitly state they would not recommend the facility based on their negative experiences.
Management and leadership: Management receives mixed feedback. Several comments praise management for being open to address concerns, prompt in crisis management during COVID-19, and actively working on improvements (new director of nursing, staffing improvements underway). Admissions and some administrative interactions are described as smooth and compassionate. Conversely, other reviewers raised concerns about unorganized leadership, unprofessional staff, or a rude/ threatening administrator; one review mentioned COO intervention and follow-up. These mixed reports indicate leadership responsiveness in some instances but also highlight inconsistency in professional conduct and organizational oversight.
Activities, dining, and environment: The activities program is a clear strength — many reviews emphasize monthly menus, frequent outings, concerts, family events, and daily social programming that keep residents engaged. Dining is generally described positively: residents are well-fed, and menus are varied. The campus environment (gardens, ponds, remodeling, and decor) contributes substantially to residents’ quality of life and family satisfaction.
Patterns and recommendations for families: The dominant pattern is a largely positive community with notable strengths in cleanliness, campus aesthetics, activities, therapy, and many caring staff members. However, recurring concerns around staffing consistency, personal care responsiveness (especially nights/third shift), staff training/ certification, and a few severe safety or documentation lapses must be weighed. Families touring or considering placement should ask specific questions about current staffing levels and turnover, third-shift care protocols, state certification for direct-care staff, recent incidents (e.g., bed bug reports) and their resolution, staffing improvements tied to the new director of nursing, and complaint/incident follow-up procedures. It also makes sense to request references from families of residents in memory care or skilled nursing, and to observe shift change and mealtime periods during visits to gauge responsiveness and staff interaction.
Conclusion: Hawthorn Glen earns many strong endorsements for its environment, activities, therapy success stories, and numerous compassionate staff members. For many families and residents it provides a safe, active, and caring home. At the same time, there are meaningful, though less frequent, reports of understaffing, inconsistent care on certain shifts, leadership issues, and isolated safety incidents that warrant careful inquiry prior to making a placement decision. The balance of reviews suggests a facility with considerable strengths and a generally positive culture, but one where quality may vary by unit and shift — making targeted questions and in-person observation essential for prospective families.
