Overall sentiment: The reviews for Ivy Grove Assisted Living are overwhelmingly negative, with multiple reviewers describing serious problems across care quality, safety, cleanliness, staffing, and management. While a very small number of comments suggest the community may be appropriate for a limited subset of residents (one-on-one praise for a visit and a note that a client is doing well), the dominant themes indicate pervasive dissatisfaction and concern, including some allegations of severe incidents that families found alarming.
Care quality and clinical concerns: Numerous reviewers reported poor nursing care and even indicated that there were times with no nurses on site. Reports include residents experiencing weight loss, dehydration, substandard meals, and generally poor nutrition. Several reviews express explicit concerns about dementia-related care, suggesting that residents with cognitive impairment were not being adequately managed. There are also reports of delayed notifications to hospitals and families about resident status changes, and at least one account mentions coroner involvement and a "mysterious death," which reviewers connected to neglect or miscommunication with medical providers. Taken together, these comments point to systemic problems in clinical oversight, emergency response, and continuity of care.
Staff behavior and communication: A recurring complaint is unprofessional or rude staff and management. Reviewers describe mistreatment, poor customer service, and communication breakdowns, including accusations that staff were dismissive or improperly handled power-of-attorney paperwork. Some reviewers noted accent-related misunderstandings as a communication barrier, while others reported outright failures to contact families or to inform them promptly about hospital transfers. These patterns suggest both interpersonal and administrative communication deficits that undermine family trust and resident safety.
Facilities, cleanliness, and safety: The physical condition of the building and rooms drew extensive criticism. Complaints include pervasive urine odor, presence of bugs, peeling wallpaper and paint, broken furniture, and poor-quality beds. Rooms were described as overcrowded with insufficient privacy. Multiple reviewers called the facility "absolutely disgusting," "never clean," and said it was "not for any living soul." Beyond hygiene, reviewers raised concrete safety hazards — unsafe fire and heating systems were mentioned, along with specific risks such as unsecured ladder or gutter-cleaning practices that could endanger residents. These issues combine to create an environment that reviewers perceive as both unhealthy and unsafe.
Administration, billing, and alleged misconduct: Management is frequently characterized as unqualified and unprofessional. Several reviews allege fraudulent practices or mismanagement, and complaints about high charges or fees appear alongside reports of poor service. Specific administrative failures were cited, such as not providing POA paperwork and delays or errors in hospital communications. Reviewers also reported that facility leadership did not respond appropriately to concerns, contributing to a sense of systemic neglect rather than isolated staff lapses.
Serious incidents and patterns of neglect: Some reviews describe particularly alarming events — a mysterious death prompting coroner involvement, hospital miscommunications, and statements implying neglect that could lead to fatal outcomes. While these are reported as reviewer accounts rather than independently verified facts, they form a pattern of grave allegations that multiple reviewers raised. The combination of clinical lapses, poor facility conditions, and managerial failures amplifies the risk to residents and raises urgent questions about oversight, licensing, and quality assurance.
Minor positive notes and context: A few reviewers felt the community was a good fit for certain intended residents, and at least one reported a positive visit and that a client was doing well. These isolated positives suggest that experiences may vary by unit, staff on duty, or individual resident needs, but they are heavily outweighed by the consistent, detailed negative reports.
Conclusion and implications: The reviews paint a picture of a facility with widespread problems in caregiving, cleanliness, safety, and administration. Frequent, specific complaints about neglect, poor clinical care, unsanitary conditions, and serious incidents indicate systemic issues rather than occasional lapses. Families considering Ivy Grove should exercise caution: verify staffing levels and clinical oversight, request documentation (including recent inspection reports and staffing certifications), ask for references from current residents’ families, and, if possible, conduct multiple unannounced visits at varied times. Regulators or licensing authorities may also warrant notification given the nature and gravity of the recurring allegations described by reviewers.
