The reviews for Avamere Rehabilitation of Junction City present a highly mixed and polarized picture, with strong praise from some families and residents alongside serious and recurring complaints from others. A recurring positive thread is that certain staff members — particularly some CNAs, therapy staff (OT/PT), dining services, and housekeeping — are described as caring, professional, and attentive. Several reviewers specifically praised the food and dining experience, as well as family-oriented touches like a cookie cart and opportunities for meaningful visitation after restrictions. In these reports, residents and families felt well cared for, supported, and emotionally connected to staff.
However, a significant number of reviews describe systemic problems that raise safety and quality-of-care concerns. Short-staffing is a dominant theme and appears to contribute to multiple adverse outcomes: delayed or unanswered call lights, residents left unattended (including being left outside), inadequate assistance with bathing and toileting, and failures to follow prescribed dietary plans or provide meal supplements. Specific serious incidents were reported, including a resident dropped from bed, a resident developing a black eye, falls while trying to use the restroom, and a cited infection that reviewers tied to poor care and which allegedly led to a death. These accounts indicate gaps in supervision, timely nursing response, and basic resident safety procedures.
Facility cleanliness and maintenance are reported inconsistently. While housekeeping is praised in some accounts for keeping rooms clean, other reviews describe dirty sheets, sticky bedside tables, and strong odors of human waste which reviewers say are masked by air fresheners rather than resolved. Infrastructure and comfort problems were also noted: rooms with inadequate heat, instances where water was not provided, and crowded rooms (reports of three residents in a room). Privacy lapses — curtains not being drawn and doors left open — and hygiene oversights (gowns not changed, commode not emptied) further point to lapses in routine care and respect for residents.
Communication and administration are another area of divergence. Many families reported poor communication, lack of responsiveness from front-desk or administrative staff, and an unprofessional or uncaring tone from some employees. These communication breakdowns exacerbate family frustration, often forcing relatives to advocate strongly and repeatedly to secure even basic services or follow prescribed medical plans. At the same time, several reviewers singled out particular administrators and staff who were professional and supportive, reinforcing the impression that the quality of care can vary substantially depending on the shift, unit, or individual staff members.
Other notable concerns include allegations of discriminatory treatment regarding service animals, with reports of staff bullying and denial of entry for a service animal despite reportedly more accommodating policies at other Avamere locations. Reviewers also mentioned inconsistent enforcement of rules and policies when compared to sister facilities, contributing to confusion and distrust. Several families explicitly stated they would not recommend the facility in its current state and moved loved ones to other facilities for better care.
Overall sentiment is deeply divided: some families and residents describe an "amazing" experience with compassionate caregivers and good services, while others report troubling safety incidents, neglect, and unprofessional behavior that, in some cases, had serious consequences. The most frequently mentioned negative themes — short-staffing, delayed nursing response, safety incidents, hygiene problems, dietary neglect, and poor administrative communication — form a consistent pattern across multiple reviews and suggest systemic issues that need addressing. Where the facility receives praise, it tends to be for individual staff members or specific departments (dining, housekeeping, therapy), indicating that strengths exist but are not uniformly applied. These reviews collectively point to variability in quality and the need for better staffing, stronger supervision, improved communication with families, consistent enforcement of policies, and a renewed focus on basic hygiene and safety protocols to ensure reliable, dignified care for all residents.
