Overall sentiment across the reviews is sharply mixed, with a clear polarization between many very positive personal experiences and multiple serious negative reports. Positive reviewers frequently praise the facility's physical environment — describing it as modern, beautifully remodeled, and clean with welcoming central meeting areas. They note that rooms are neat, often receive pre-move-in touch-ups, and that common spaces have a homelike feel. Several reviewers specifically call out flexible dining options (an all-day menu), plentiful activities such as bingo and reading opportunities, and good placement/visit experiences.
Staffing and direct caregiving evoke both the strongest praise and the strongest criticism. A sizable group of reviewers describe the staff as attentive, compassionate, professional, and above-and-beyond in their service; some single out individual employees (Stacy, Robert, Billy) for exceptional care, and there are multiple reports of strong family communication including staff-arranged video chats, timely response to call lights, dignity-preserving interactions, and excellent end-of-life or memory-care support. Conversely, other reviewers describe understaffing, reliance on temporary/agency staff, and a pervasive lack of urgency. These negative reports include accounts of rude or snobby attitudes from some employees and administrative personnel, inconsistent professionalism across shifts, and an overall impression that care quality depends heavily on which staff are working.
Clinical and safety issues are a frequent and serious theme among negative reviews. Complaints include reports of residents falling multiple times, long waits for assistance, bandages not being changed for days, bed sores, inadequate bathroom help, and residents being allowed to remain in the same clothing for extended periods. Several reviews go so far as to allege dangerous or neglectful care — one reviewer said staff nearly killed a family member — and others describe instances of staff lying or hiding from families, outside smoking on premises, and refused rehab services. These accounts point to variability in clinical oversight and wound/skin care, and raise concerns about monitoring, staffing ratios, and escalation when medical needs arise.
Dining experiences are mixed: some residents enjoy the food and appreciate flexible meal options, while others report poor meal quality (dry or chewy food, small portions) and lapses such as forgotten drinks. Activity programming is generally described as available and plentiful for those who want it, including bingo and reading materials, but a few reviewers felt assisted living lacked sufficient structure. Memory care and some rehabilitation services receive commendations from several families who felt those units outshone competing options, indicating pockets of strong clinical and social programming.
Management and administrative issues appear in multiple reviews. Some families report helpful, compassionate administrative interactions, while others report rude or money-focused behavior from the financial department and allege preferential treatment tied to payor source (Medicare/Medicaid discrimination). This contributes to an impression that access to certain services or the quality of interactions can be influenced by financial status or the particular staff member handling the case.
In summary, Ohio Living Quaker Heights elicits two distinct narratives. Many families and residents describe an attractive, modern facility staffed by compassionate, professional caregivers who provide strong communication, memory care, rehab, and end-of-life services. At the same time, a significant set of reviews detail troubling neglect, staffing shortages, inconsistent clinical care, and problematic attitudes from some staff and administrators. Prospective residents and families should weigh both sets of experiences, tour the facility at multiple times of day, ask specific questions about staffing ratios, wound care protocols, and how the facility handles incidents/falls, and request references from current families in the particular unit they are considering. The variability in reported experiences suggests that outcomes may depend heavily on unit, shift, and individual caregivers, so targeted inquiries and observation are advisable before making placement decisions.
