Overall sentiment in the reviews is strongly negative, dominated by complaints about communication breakdowns, management and operational lapses, and problems with handling residents' personal items. While several reviewers explicitly praised individual staff members as kind, caring, and very nice, those positive remarks are outweighed by recurring, concrete service failures that lead to an overall conclusion of dissatisfaction and statements that they would not recommend the facility.
Care quality and staff interactions present a mixed picture. Multiple reviewers call out staff who were kind and caring, which indicates that some frontline caregivers make a positive impression. However, praise for individual staff does not counterbalance several operational and safety-related concerns: reviewers report nurses wearing masks improperly, which raises potential infection control worries, and there are complaints about restricted family visitation that have negatively affected families' experiences. The presence of both positive staff comments and serious procedural complaints suggests inconsistency in day-to-day care and enforcement of protocols.
Communication and management are central themes in the negative feedback. Reviewers repeatedly cite unresponsiveness — phone calls going unanswered and social worker messages being ignored — and report that out-of-town family members were left without necessary information when planning visits. These specific communication failures contribute to a broader perception among reviewers that the facility is poorly run or managed. Statements explicitly expressing concerns about how the facility is run appear alongside descriptions of unanswered calls and ignored messages, indicating a pattern rather than isolated incidents.
Operational issues extend to the handling of residents' personal belongings. Multiple reviewers report clothes mix-ups and belongings not being returned, which are tangible service failures that directly affect residents and families. Combined with the communication and management complaints, these property-handling problems reinforce the impression of systemic lapses in routine processes and accountability.
Several notable areas are not addressed in these reviews: there is no substantive feedback about dining quality, recreational activities, therapy services, or the physical condition of the facility beyond the issues already mentioned. The absence of comments in those categories should be interpreted as a lack of available information from these particular reviews rather than as an endorsement or criticism of those service areas.
In summary, the reviews paint a facility where some staff are compassionate and capable, but persistent and serious problems with communication, property management, procedural adherence (mask use), and visitation policies create significant concern among reviewers. The most common actionable themes are unresponsiveness to calls and messages, mishandling of residents' belongings, and doubts about management effectiveness. These recurring issues are the primary drivers of the extremely negative overall sentiment and the repeated statements that reviewers would not recommend Poinsett Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center.
