Overall sentiment: The reviews for Cleveland Manor Nursing Home are mixed but skew strongly negative, with several reviews raising very serious safety and quality-of-care concerns alongside a smaller set of clearly positive comments. The most prominent themes are allegations of dangerous medical and medication errors, inconsistent and sometimes neglectful caregiving, cleanliness and maintenance problems, and unresolved regulatory complaints. A minority of reviewers report friendly, helpful staff and a clean, caring environment, which indicates a wide variation in resident and family experiences.
Care quality and medical safety: Multiple reviewers allege serious clinical failures. Specific allegations include inappropriate administration of Xanax to a patient with COPD and at least one reviewer explicitly attributing a resident's death to facility actions. Another review mentions a medical/surgical error tied to Dr. Ahmadidina and criticizes physician assistant (PA) staff. Several comments note poor nursing knowledge. These reports suggest potential problems with medication management, clinician competence, or care coordination in some cases. The presence of such allegations—especially when tied to severe outcomes—constitutes the most serious pattern in the negative feedback.
Staff responsiveness and neglect: A recurrent theme is staff being unresponsive or very slow to assist residents. Examples cited include long delays for help and a specific report of a resident not receiving a shower for over a month. These complaints are described as care neglect by reviewers, and at least one person filed a DHS complaint that they state was not addressed. Such descriptions point to issues with staffing levels, supervision, workload, or accountability that result in gaps in basic daily care.
Facility cleanliness and maintenance: Several reviewers report problems with cleanliness and odors—phrases include "never clean" and "stinks." One reviewer accuses the facility of superficial maintenance practices (described as "pretend to wax floors"). Another notes the facility is "not as pictured." These comments indicate concerns about routine housekeeping, sanitation, and the accuracy of marketing materials or online representations.
Services and expectations: There is at least one explicit statement that the facility lacks memory care, contrary to what some might expect or what listings might imply. Combined with comments advising others not to place loved ones there, these remarks highlight mismatches between family expectations and the actual services or level of care provided.
Positive experiences: Not all feedback is negative. Multiple reviewers describe staff as friendly and helpful, say the facility is clean, and praise the residents and the loving care they received. Some reviewers explicitly call it a "good place" and say it provides assistance for loved ones. These positive reports suggest that experiences at the facility can be acceptable or even good under certain circumstances or in specific units/shifts.
Overall pattern and implications: The reviews show a bifurcated pattern: a smaller but notable group of positive experiences coexisting with numerous and significant allegations of neglect, clinical errors, and poor oversight. The most concerning and frequently mentioned issues are medication/medical errors and unresponsiveness leading to neglect of basic care. Cleanliness and possible misleading presentation are recurrent operational concerns. The presence of an alleged unresolved DHS complaint amplifies worries about quality assurance and regulatory follow-through.
Actionable considerations (based on review content): Given the severity of some allegations, prospective residents and families should treat these reviews as cautionary signals. Important questions to raise when evaluating the facility further (informed by the reviews) include verifying current staffing levels and turnover, asking about medication management and adverse event history, confirming availability of memory care if needed, requesting recent inspection or DHS complaint resolution records, and visiting at different times to observe cleanliness and staff responsiveness. The mixed nature of the reviews indicates variability in resident experience—some report good, caring service while others report extreme lapses—so direct verification and due diligence are advised.
