The reviews for Ridgeview Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center are highly polarized, with a strong split between reports of excellent, compassionate caregiving and severe allegations of neglect, poor management, and unsafe conditions. Many reviewers praise individual nurses and aides as kind, attentive, knowledgeable, and even credited staff with life‑saving interventions and dependable transportation to appointments. These positive accounts describe residents being happy, well cared for, and receiving clear explanations and trustworthy support from particular caregivers or teams.
Contrasting sharply with those positives, a substantial portion of the reviews describe serious quality and safety concerns. Multiple reviewers allege medical negligence, including failure to follow physician orders or discharge instructions and neglect of open wounds and sores. There are reports of delayed care that required ambulance transfers, and one summary explicitly mentions involvement of the coroner in a resident death. Such allegations point to potentially systemic clinical deficiencies rather than isolated incidents.
Staff behavior and communication is another consistently mixed theme. Several reviews highlight compassionate, skilled staff, while many others recount rude, uncaring, or unprofessional interactions from nurses, receptionists, and administrators. High staff turnover and reported staffing shortages appear to be a recurring factor tied to the inconsistent care—when staffing is thin or personnel are inexperienced or unpaid, reviewers report longer waits for basic needs (e.g., bedpans), neglect, and minimal social or activity engagement for residents.
Facility cleanliness, safety, and security are frequent concerns in the negative reviews. Complaints include dirty floors, soiled diapers on the floor, unclean rooms, locked fire doors, and reports of jewelry theft with apparent blame‑shifting between staff and management. These issues raise both infection control and resident safety flags. Conversely, positive reviewers do not dispute these problems directly but indicate that cleanliness and order can be satisfactory at times, likely reflecting variability between shifts or units.
Management and administrative responsiveness is another major fault line in the feedback. Several reviewers describe unreachable management, poor complaint handling, lack of apologies or follow‑up, and accusations of dishonesty or cover‑ups. There are also comments alleging an overemphasis on financial matters or resident assets rather than resident welfare. Some reviewers named a problematic administrator (including allegations of racist or hostile behavior) and noted poor phone reception and front‑desk responsiveness, all of which contribute to families feeling unsupported and unheard.
Programming and resident life receive mixed mentions: a few reviewers praise transportation services and attentive social support, while others say there are no meaningful activities and that social work services are inadequate or insensitive. COVID and infection protocols are described as unclear by some visitors, suggesting inconsistent communication or enforcement of public health measures.
Patterns across the reviews suggest that Ridgeview's strengths are concentrated in individual caregivers who provide compassionate, competent care; these staff members are frequently singled out for praise. The weaknesses appear more structural: inconsistent staffing levels, variable training and professionalism, lapses in clinical follow‑through (especially wound care), and facility‑level problems with cleanliness, safety, and management responsiveness. That variability is the central theme—experiences range from “one of the best places I have been to” to calls for the facility to be shut down.
For families or professionals evaluating Ridgeview, the reviews indicate meaningful risk alongside areas of genuine strength. If considering placement, in‑person visits across different shifts, direct questions about wound care protocols and staffing ratios, verification of how management handles complaints, and review of security and infection‑control measures would be prudent. For Ridgeview leadership, the reviews collectively point to urgent priorities: stabilize staffing and payroll, and ensure training and supervision that reduce variability in care; address wound care and clinical follow‑up protocols; improve cleanliness and safety practices; institute transparent complaint resolution and communication procedures; and secure residents’ valuables. Addressing these systemic issues would likely reduce the most serious negative experiences while preserving and amplifying the clearly valued strengths of dedicated caregivers.
