The reviews for Manor At Perrysburg present a strongly mixed and polarized picture: a notable number of families and short-term rehab patients praise the therapy team, particular therapists, and several individual staff members for helping residents recover and return home, while other reviewers report serious safety, clinical, and administrative failures. The most consistent positives center on the rehabilitation services and on individual caregivers who are described as compassionate, personable, and effective. Multiple accounts speak highly of the therapy gym, the quality of physical therapy (including named praise), attentive front-desk staff, and the facility’s ability — at times — to provide personalized, family-like care. Several reviewers emphasize that the facility can be excellent for short-term rehab or respite: patients progressed after surgery or stroke and were satisfied with therapist-led recoveries and walker training. Amenities and atmosphere are also praised by some: semi-private rooms with curtains, TVs in bedrooms, activities (singing, bingo, games), pleasant smells from the kitchen, and occasional good desserts and meals were noted.
Contrasting sharply with those positive reports are frequent and serious concerns about staffing, responsiveness, safety, and management. A dominant theme is chronic short-staffing and overworked aides and nurses — reviewers repeatedly describe long call-light response times, aides who are “disappearing,” and inconsistent care especially on second shift. This staffing strain is linked to hygiene and basic-care lapses: limited access to showers, reports that water was not changed unless explicitly requested, infrequent hair washing, unclean rooms for days, trash accumulation, and missed equipment orders. Food quality comments are inconsistent; while some reviewers mention tasty meals and good smells, others call meals inedible and link these issues to weight loss (one review cites an 8-lb loss). Administrative problems are recurrent: discharge difficulties, incorrect POA paperwork, transportation coordination failures, and missing laundry or personal items are commonly described.
More alarming are multiple reports alleging critical lapses in clinical care and resident safety. Several reviewers describe significant delays or refusals to provide oxygen after admission, difficulty obtaining bedrails or alarms because they were labeled as restraints, and inadequate fall monitoring — incidents that are reported to have led to falls, severe injuries (including a massive black eye and facial injuries with blood), hospitalization, and in one account, death following C. difficile infection and bedsores. Other reviewers describe deterioration while at the facility (pneumonia and ICU transfer), suspected drugging/sedation, intimidation or blocking of EMTs, and alleged staff negligence to the point that Adult Protective Services, state authorities, emergency guardianship, and Medicare complaints were invoked. These are serious allegations that multiple reviewers independently reported, indicating patterns of both clinical and administrative failure in some cases.
Staff behavior and competency are described in sharply divergent terms depending on who is on duty and which unit a resident is on. Many reviews single out excellent, warm, and attentive caregivers and therapists, while others condemn rude, inattentive, or disinterested staff — reports mention staff sitting in lounges, being impatient with residents, or being unresponsive to family calls (including rude phone handling and hung-up calls). Memory care receives mixed comments: some reviewers find the memory care staff kind and entertaining, while others warn the facility is not equipped for dementia care, suggesting variability in training and capacity. Night and weekend coverage appear to be weaker based on comments about second-shift performance, nighttime hallway noise, and delayed responses after hours.
Facility appearance and physical environment are generally described as older but acceptable: reviewers call it a “pretty” facility, with an older style that some find comforting (curtains, two-bed rooms), and therapy spaces are appreciated. However, reviewers emphasize that a tidy appearance does not guarantee competent care — multiple accounts explicitly warn that the facility looks nice but care quality and safety can be lacking. A recurring pattern is that short-term, well-supported rehab stays with engaged therapists and attentive staff result in positive outcomes, while long-term stays, dementia care, or periods of understaffing correlate with the more severe negative reports.
In summary, Manor At Perrysburg elicits widely divergent experiences. The facility can provide highly effective rehabilitation and has several caring, skilled employees who make measurable positive differences for some residents. At the same time, there are numerous and significant concerns about staffing levels, timely clinical care (notably oxygen, fall prevention, infection control), administrative competence (discharge, paperwork, lost items), and serious allegations of negligence or mistreatment. The pattern suggests that quality of care is inconsistent and highly dependent on staffing, shift, and individual caregivers. Prospective residents and families should weigh the documented strengths in therapy and some staff members against the repeated reports of safety, communication, and administrative failures, and should monitor oxygen access, fall protections, staffing levels, care plans, and discharge procedures closely if choosing this facility.
