Overall sentiment: The reviews for AMITY Serenity Pines Personal Care Home are predominantly negative, with several recurring and serious concerns outweighing the few positive notes. Multiple reviewers raise alarms about the quality and consistency of care provided, and many of the complaints point to systemic problems (understaffing, management failures, safety and dignity issues) rather than isolated incidents. While a number of reviewers do note that some staff are friendly and that the environment can feel warm, these positives are repeatedly framed as 'for what they have'—suggesting goodwill among certain employees but insufficient institutional support and resources.
Care quality and staffing: The most frequent and consequential theme is understaffing. Reviewers explicitly say there are not enough caregivers, and they link that shortage to poor care outcomes: late meals, denial of basic requests (for example, being refused drinks), and what some call 'horrible care.' Understaffing appears to affect both daily routines and safety. Several reviews allege improper caregiver behavior and poor responsiveness, indicating that resident needs are not consistently met. These accounts suggest that staffing levels and staff training/oversight are central problems impacting resident well-being.
Staff and management behavior: Reviews paint a mixed picture of the frontline staff—'mostly nice' or 'some staff are friendly'—but also indicate problems with attitude among certain employees. More serious management-level concerns are repeatedly mentioned: complaints that the owner does not pay for employee health insurance, reports that a supervisor sleeps in her office while on duty, and allegations that management has attempted to push residents out. These remarks point to potential ethical and regulatory issues and suggest a lack of effective oversight. Overall, reviewers distinguish between individual caregivers who try to do a good job and leadership that is perceived as inadequate or problematic.
Dining and basic services: Food and meal service are another clear area of dissatisfaction. Reported problems include late dinners, low-quality meals, and limited portion sizes. These complaints are linked in reviews to understaffing and poor management—meal timing and adequacy suffer when staffing and planning are insufficient. Denial of drinks and other basic service refusals were explicitly called out and contribute strongly to the overall negative impression of day-to-day care.
Safety, resident rights, and notable incidents: Several reviewers recount concerning incidents that raise questions about resident safety and rights. Attempts to evict or force residents out, alleged sleep-on-the-job behavior by a supervisor, and denial of basic needs like drinks are examples cited. These items go beyond service dissatisfaction and enter the realm of potential regulatory noncompliance or neglect. Reviewers use strong language (e.g., 'do not recommend,' 'horrible care') which underscores the seriousness with which they view these incidents.
Cost and value: Price is another recurrent theme: reviewers explicitly call the facility 'overpriced' for the stated rate of $2000/month in light of the care quality and services provided. When cost is compared to the reported level of care, food quality, and staffing problems, reviewers conclude that the value proposition is poor. This perception may be especially important for prospective residents or families balancing budget and care needs.
Overall assessment and patterns: In synthesis, the reviews present a facility where individual employees often demonstrate warmth and attempt to provide good care, but where systemic issues—especially chronic understaffing, weak management, and problems with basic services—produce frequent lapses in care and several troubling practices. The most urgent red flags from the reviews are records of denied basic needs, late meals, alleged supervisor negligence, and attempts to remove residents. Prospective residents and families should weigh the reported friendly attitude of some staff against these significant, repeatedly cited concerns. If considering this facility, an in-person visit focusing on current staffing levels, meal schedules, documentation of staff training and insurance/benefits practices, and clear answers about residents' rights and eviction policies would be advisable. Additionally, checking recent inspection reports or regulatory complaints could help verify whether the issues described in reviews are ongoing or have been addressed.
