Overall sentiment in the reviews for Hillcrest Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center is highly polarized, with a wide spread between reports of excellent, family-like care and reports describing severe neglect, safety hazards, and unprofessional behavior. Numerous reviewers praise individual caregivers, nurses, and certain administrative staff; these positive accounts emphasize compassion, responsiveness, good communication, and effective rehab that helped residents return home. At the same time, a substantial portion of reviews describe systemic problems — some of which are serious and potentially dangerous — that raise red flags about consistent quality, safety, and oversight.
Care quality and staffing: A recurring pattern is great variability in caregiving. Many families name specific RNs, LPNs, and CNAs who went "above and beyond," sat with residents, and provided attentive support. Conversely, there are repeated and troubling reports of neglect: residents left in soiled diapers, not assisted to the bathroom leading to recurrent UTIs, call lights ignored, missed feedings, rough handling in transfers and therapy, and falls not properly addressed or communicated. Multiple posts explicitly mention the facility being understaffed and using agency nurses; these staffing constraints appear linked to delayed responses, unattended alarms, and inconsistent therapy delivery.
Safety, sanitation, and infection control: Serious safety and sanitation concerns appear in many reviews. Complaints include strong urine odors, dirty rooms, mold, water damage, exposed electrical wiring, missing cover plates, leaking toilets, and even extreme allegations such as maggots and unattended severe wounds. Several reviewers reported infection-related events (UTIs, osteomyelitis requiring surgery) and urged review of infection control practices. These accounts, when paired with reports of paramedics being called and medication mismanagement, suggest lapses in both environmental maintenance and clinical oversight in certain cases.
Belongings, security, and environment: Theft and missing personal items (cell phones, shoes, dentures, wedding rings) are reported multiple times, creating concerns about security and property management. The building condition is described inconsistently — some reviewers find the facility immaculate and well-maintained under recent ownership, while others describe stained ceilings, holes in walls and floors, unused equipment left in rooms, and general run-down areas. Outdoor spaces and memory care areas are mentioned as limited or not secure, and some memory-care rooms are judged inferior to regular rooms.
Therapy and activities: Rehab services are available and praised by many for their effectiveness and for helping residents return home. However, other families report therapy being limited (short sessions, group-based with little individual engagement), unannounced, or abruptly stopped. Weekend PT availability is noted as limited. Activities and social spaces are highlighted positively by some (lobby, TV room, events) but reviewers also note that a high proportion of bedridden residents and staffing constraints reduce the range and frequency of activities.
Dining and ancillary services: Meal experiences are mixed. Several reviewers compliment the food (even "delicious"), customization for dietary needs, and the staff’s willingness to provide extra trays. Yet there are numerous complaints about poor-quality food, late meals, insufficient soft-diet options, and specific negative incidents (e.g., poor weekend meals, baloney sandwiches). Social workers and administrative staff receive positive comments in many reports for being organized and supportive, but other families describe dismissive supervisors and poor communication.
Management and variability over time: A notable theme is inconsistency — some reviewers highlight recent positive changes under new ownership and praise management for being attentive and improving atmosphere, while others recount longstanding neglect and urge families to avoid the facility. Several reviews cite specific staff members (LPNs Karen and Kathy, night CNA Amanda, infection preventionist April) as exemplary, indicating that individual employees can significantly affect resident experience. The broad range of accounts suggests that quality may depend heavily on staffing levels, shift/individual personnel, and periods of leadership attention.
Bottom line and notable concerns: The reviews present a split reality. There are clear examples of compassionate, competent care, effective rehab services, and staff who make residents and families feel supported — making Hillcrest a good fit for some residents. However, the frequency and severity of negative reports — particularly those describing neglect (soiled residents, ignored alarms), sanitation hazards (mold, water damage, alleged maggots), medication and infection control failures, and missing belongings — are alarming and cannot be ignored. Prospective residents and families should seek up-to-date evidence of corrective actions (infection-control audits, staffing ratios, maintenance repairs), ask for recent inspection reports, verify which staff work consistent shifts, and, if possible, tour the facility during multiple times of day and week to assess cleanliness, staff responsiveness, and therapy/activity availability. Immediate investigation would be warranted for any reported severe incidents (maggots, open wounds, serious infection) and any current families should escalate those concerns to regulators if not satisfactorily addressed.
