Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly mixed, with a pronounced split between experiences praising individual caregivers and therapy teams and experiences describing operational and clinical failures. The most consistent positive thread is the strength of the therapy department and many frontline caregivers: multiple reviewers specifically highlight exceptional physical, occupational, and speech therapists who deliver daily, thorough therapy and measurable functional gains. Families repeatedly credit therapists and certain nurses/aides with restoring independence (e.g., showering, dressing, regaining limb strength) and bridging patients successfully from hospital to home. Numerous reviewers describe specific staff members (Larissa, Nancy, Shasta and others) and characterize them as compassionate, communicative, and committed—creating a family-like atmosphere and delivering above-and-beyond care. Several accounts also note comfortable single rooms, visible renovations, modernizing updates under new ownership, and a convenient location near local amenities.
Counterbalancing those positives are frequent and serious operational and clinical concerns. Many reviews describe inconsistency in cleanliness and infection control: while some people call the facility exceptionally clean, others report rooms that are "dirty/disgusting," pest sightings (roaches/bugs), soaked beds, and lack of basic supplies such as soap. Staffing levels appear variable—multiple complaints about understaffing, ignored call buzzers, and agency staff who will not provide hands-on care point to systemic workload and staffing challenges. Several reviewers report poor management accountability: unanswered calls, inaccessible administrators, and a perception that problems are not escalated or resolved. Billing and administrative issues recur as well, including billing for a doctor who was not seen and refund difficulties.
Clinical safety and medical oversight emerge as important red flags in a subset of reviews. There are allegations of medication errors and poor physician management, including a report of prolonged or excessive prednisone use (described as an overdose or eight-week steroid course) with adverse consequences. Some reviewers reported no doctor available over weekends, missed medication administration, and a lack of testing for infectious conditions (e.g., flu), which together suggest potential gaps in clinical governance. These issues contrast sharply with reports of high-quality, clearly qualified therapy and nursing care—underscoring significant inconsistency in clinical services depending on staff on duty.
Facility condition and amenities are portrayed as transitional: multiple reviewers mention ongoing renovations and improvements under new ownership, with some praising visible upgrades and a more modern look. At the same time, other areas remain dated or in disrepair for some residents, including leaky ceilings, bathroom deterioration, uncomfortable beds, and episodic maintenance disturbances during resident stays. Dining is another mixed area—some guests praise the food, while others call meals inedible and note a lack of dietary accommodation for diabetics (no sugar-free drinks or diabetic meals in some reports). Practical concerns such as transportation limitations for bariatric patients, noisy roommates (e.g., BPAP machines) with no room-change offered, and reports of pets/dogs in hallways also appear in the negative feedback.
Patterns suggest a facility in transition: several reviewers explicitly cite new management and positive changes (improved appearance, more present and connected leadership, and staff who are attentive), while others describe the older, "mom-and-pop" feel and ongoing problems that have not yet been resolved. This split experience indicates variability across units, shifts, and time: when well-staffed and under engaged leadership, patient outcomes and satisfaction can be excellent, especially in therapy; when understaffed, with temporary agency personnel or absent administration, the same facility can produce neglectful, unsafe, or unsanitary conditions.
In summary, Oak View Health and Rehabilitation receives strong praise for its therapy teams and many frontline caregivers who deliver compassionate, effective rehabilitation and family-centered support. However, persistent operational, clinical, and environmental concerns—billing irregularities, inconsistent cleanliness, understaffing, medication/physician oversight problems, and unreliable administration—appear frequently enough to be considered significant risks. Prospective residents and families should weigh the high-quality rehabilitation and certain standout staff against the documented issues. Suggested due diligence before admission includes asking about current management and staffing ratios, recent infection-control inspections, medication oversight protocols, how billing and refunds are handled, diabetic meal availability, and a tour to observe cleanliness and active shifts at different times of day.
