Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed, with a strong polarity between families who praise the staff and administration (especially references to an administrator named Kaylene) and families who report serious care and management failures. Many reviewers emphasize the compassion and dedication of individual caregivers — staff are repeatedly described as kind, attentive, and as treating residents like family. Several comments highlight concrete positive touches (Donut Friday, staff spending personal money for resident needs) and speak to a small, homey atmosphere, secure facility, good food variety, and an intimate setting that allows for more one-on-one interaction. Multiple reviewers report a positive move-in experience, responsive communication from administration, and observable improvements in care under newer leadership.
However, a substantial subset of summaries raises significant concerns about care quality and safety. Serious allegations include residents being left unattended for hours, inadequate feeding assistance, infrequent monitoring, patients left in urine, and hygiene issues such as mold under nails and misuse of lotion. There are reports of a resident’s death referenced in the reviews and multiple accounts of emotional distress caused by perceived neglect. Staffing levels are a recurring problem: reviewers note short staffing, overwhelmed caregivers, and staff no-shows, which families link to missed care and reduced activity/dining engagement for residents.
Management and administration emerge as a major area of division. On one hand, several reviewers praise Kaylene and other administrators as responsive, knowledgeable, and instrumental in improving care and family peace of mind. On the other hand, other reports describe management as rude, fear-based, or intimidating, and allege regulatory violations and unsafe practices such as insulin administration without proper delegation. This inconsistency suggests variable experiences possibly tied to timing, particular shifts, or individual staff. Communication problems are also frequently mentioned: lost or mishandled belongings, mixed clothing, scheduling errors, and miscommunication about resident possessions and hospital transfers appear in multiple summaries.
Facilities and programming draw mixed commentary. Many reviewers find the facility clean, well-decorated, and secure, with adequate food variety and a comforting atmosphere. Conversely, some note odors from open bathrooms, inconsistent cleanliness, and minimal resident activities — reports range from an activity board listing 2–3 options to allegations of “no real activities” and limited resident interaction. Dining is similarly split: several reviewers praise the food and options, while others see minimal dining engagement and a lack of robust activity programming, which can compound isolation for residents.
Taken together, the reviews paint a picture of a small, potentially very caring facility that can provide excellent, family-like attention for some residents, particularly under administrators who are praised by families. Simultaneously, there are multiple serious red flags about neglect, staffing shortages, hygiene, management style, communication breakdowns, and alleged regulatory and safety issues. The contrast between highly positive and highly negative experiences is stark. Prospective families should weigh the evident strengths — caring staff, small-home feel, responsive administrators (where noted) — against the recurring and specific concerns. If considering this facility, it would be prudent to ask direct questions about staffing ratios and turnover, medication delegation (especially insulin), incident reporting and mandatory reporting practices, laundry and belongings procedures, activity programming, and to observe care interactions and cleanliness in person across multiple shifts. Follow-up with state inspection records and references from current families could help clarify whether the positive reports reflect recent, consistent improvements or whether the negative reports indicate ongoing systemic problems.
