Overall sentiment across reviews for The Palms at Florence is highly polarized: a substantial number of families report positive, even excellent, experiences with compassionate staff, clean rooms, effective rehabilitation, and engaging activities, while another significant group reports severe neglect, medical errors, abuse, and mismanagement. The pattern is not uniform — many reviewers explicitly state the facility was a blessing and provided peace of mind, whereas others describe preventable harm, decline after admission, and alleged rights violations. This divergence is one of the most consistent themes in the feedback and indicates large variability in care depending on unit, staff on duty, or time period.
Care quality and safety are central concerns in the negative reviews. Multiple accounts allege negligent clinical care: residents reportedly left on the floor for hours after falls, bedridden patients left with food trays or soiled linens until family arrived, and wounds or bedsores that progressed to infection and in some cases required ICU care or resulted in hospice transfer. Families describe medication handling errors, poor monitoring (examples include staff who purportedly could not read a thermometer), and alleged dishonesty or miscommunication about a resident's condition. Several reviewers report verbal abuse and rights violations. There are also specific and serious allegations about over-sedation, keeping heavily sedated residents in public places (wheelchair at front desk), and concerns that sedation worsened cognitive decline. These reports together raise red flags about clinical oversight, wound care, fall prevention, and medication management.
Staffing, training, and management are recurring themes explaining the variability in care. Negative reviews frequently mention understaffing, unsafe nurse assignments, long call-light response times, CNAs or nurses taking hours to answer requests, and general high turnover among admissions and frontline staff. Several reviewers accused management of being profit-focused, defending poorly performing staff, or being oblivious to systemic problems. Conversely, many positive reviews single out 'phenomenal' nurses and CNAs, describing staff as attentive, affectionate, and professional. This suggests that while some staff and shifts deliver high-quality, person-centered care, staffing instability and inconsistent leadership contribute to episodes of poor care and family distress.
Communication and transparency show a similar split. Some families praise easy communication, prompt updates, and staff who go above and beyond; others describe poor communication, miscommunication about patient status, alleged dishonesty, missing records during admissions, and admissions staff turnover that made placement and record-transfer difficult. COVID-era practices (window visits) were mentioned, indicating restricted visitation at times, which may have amplified families' concerns. A number of reviewers specifically advise watching for how the facility communicates about falls, wounds, medication changes, and infection control.
Facility, cleanliness, dining, and activities receive mixed but specific feedback. Positive reports describe renovated rooms, no odors, pleasant common areas (porches, TV room, large dining area), regular activities like bingo, and appealing meals — several families explicitly praised the food. Other families complain of dirty water, run-down areas, cold meals, and unclean conditions in particular instances. Rehabilitation services are frequently noted as effective by families who experienced good therapy outcomes, yet there are also reports of deplorable rehab care and poor outcomes for others. This again reinforces that experiences may vary substantially by unit, shift, or timeframe.
Notable patterns and red flags: repeated mentions of bedsores and infection, residents left unattended after falls, long call-light delays, understaffing, management defensiveness, and allegations of medication and feeding mishandling are the most serious and repeatedly cited concerns. At the same time, positive reports about compassionate CNAs and nurses, successful rehab outcomes, cleanliness, and strong family communication are numerous. There are also mentions of regulatory scrutiny and investigations by some reviewers, which should prompt families to check current inspection reports and complaint histories.
Given the breadth and polarity of the reviews, families considering The Palms at Florence should perform targeted due diligence: visit during different shifts, ask to meet direct-care staff and the nurse on duty, observe mealtime and activity periods, review recent inspection and complaint reports, inquire specifically about wound care/prescription handling/fall protocols, ask about staffing ratios and turnover, and establish expectations for call-light response and family communication. If a relative is admitted, frequent in-person checks (or video visits where appropriate), prompt documentation of concerns, and escalation to management or state survey agencies if neglect or abuse is suspected are prudent. The mixed reviews show that the facility can provide high-quality, compassionate care for some residents, but there are recurring, serious allegations that warrant caution, verification, and ongoing monitoring by prospective families.
