Overall sentiment across the reviews is mixed but trends strongly toward serious concerns about management, staffing, safety, and communication, with a smaller set of reviewers reporting positive, routine experiences. The reviews reveal a facility with a long history and a prior positive reputation, but currently facing major organizational disruption (including a announced closure and leadership change) that has magnified operational and cultural problems. While some residents and family members praised friendly staff, good dinners, frequent activities, and timely resolution of isolated issues, a substantial portion of reviews describe systemic failures that affect quality of care and resident wellbeing.
Care quality and safety: Multiple reviews raise critical alarms about care and monitoring. Specific reports include delirious or medically vulnerable residents not being properly monitored, call bells going unanswered, staff appearing distracted (frequently on phones), and patients begging for assistance. These are serious red flags for resident safety and basic nursing-home responsiveness. At the same time, a minority of reviewers said their loved ones were treated well and would not oppose skilled nursing care there, indicating variability in care quality depending on unit, shift, or staff assignment.
Staff and culture: Staffing presence and professionalism are recurring issues. Many reviewers reported too few professional staff on site, bullying behavior by staff or management, and an environment where elders are treated poorly or feel unable to approach the office. Some reviewers labelled management as secretive or horrific, and alleged harassment or intimidation by office personnel. Conversely, some staff were described as friendly and effective in resolving problems, which suggests inconsistent staff performance and possibly morale or management-related problems driving uneven experiences.
Facilities and physical environment: The building is described as old and traditional, and while some reviewers said it was kept up decently, others reported dirty and underkept areas, poor-condition furniture in shared rooms, and small televisions that detract from resident comfort. There are mentions of plans to tear down buildings under new leadership, which contributes to resident and family anxiety about the future of the site and the community's physical state.
Dining and activities: Dining experiences are mixed but with notable positive comments about dinners; several reviewers specifically liked the evening meals. There are also reports of numerous activities and engagement opportunities, which were appreciated by some residents and families. However, negative comments about food quality from other reviewers indicate inconsistency in meal satisfaction.
Management, communication, and organizational change: Management and administrative practices are the most frequently criticized aspect. Reviews document eviction threats, harassment by office staff, unannounced inspections, high resident turnover, and secrecy—particularly regarding an announced closure and relocation requirement for residents to move by a stated deadline. The arrival of a new CEO (named Timothy Myers in the reviews) and talk of tearing down buildings appear to have heightened concern and confusion. These administrative actions have reportedly caused emotional distress for residents and families and undermined trust in leadership. Some reviewers also criticized the organization for not living up to its Christian mission/values.
Reputation and notable patterns: Historically, the facility had a positive reputation for providing needed care (described by one reviewer as a 'God send'), but recent reviews paint a picture of decline or turmoil. There is a clear pattern of inconsistency: some families have positive, reassuring experiences, while others report neglect, mismanagement, and even alleged atrocities. The most urgent and pervasive complaints center around understaffing, monitoring failures, management hostility or secrecy, eviction threats, and the disruption caused by the announced closure.
Bottom line: Prospective families should be cautious. If evaluating this facility, prioritize on-site visits during different shifts, inspect living areas and shared rooms, ask specifically about staffing ratios, monitoring protocols (especially for cognitively impaired or delirious residents), call-bell response times, and the facility's plans for closure and resident relocation. Request clear, written policies on transfers/evictions and inquire about the new leadership's timeline and intentions. While some residents report satisfactory care, the pattern of serious safety, communication, and management concerns means decision-makers should verify current conditions directly and consider alternative placements until organizational stability and staffing reliability can be demonstrated.
