Overall sentiment across the reviews is strongly mixed, with a large number of highly positive accounts praising Oak Harbor Healthcare (formerly Mount Pleasant Manor) for its rehabilitation outcomes, compassionate staff, and family-like atmosphere, countered by several severe negative allegations describing neglect, safety lapses, and management issues. Many reviewers describe exceptionally good experiences, especially for short-term rehab: effective physical and occupational therapy, hands-on therapists, seven-day services, and successful discharges back home. Multiple families singled out nurses, therapists, housekeeping, and admissions staff as caring, communicative, and professional; several reviewers used words such as "family," "compassionate," and "phenomenal" when describing the team. Activity programming, outings, and a welcoming environment are commonly cited positives, as are multiple reports that the building is clean, modern, and well maintained.
Care quality is the most polarizing theme. On the positive side, there are numerous detailed accounts of excellent rehabilitation care where patients recovered strength, overcame injuries, improved appetite and activity levels, and were discharged home. Reviewers repeatedly praised specific therapy staff and the interdisciplinary approach, and some emphasized that nursing care was attentive and timely. On the negative side, there are multiple serious and specific allegations of neglect: delayed pain medication, residents left in urine and feces for prolonged periods (examples range from 45 minutes to several hours), calls for help ignored, a fall that occurred despite a resident being labeled a fall risk, fecal contamination of surgical incisions, subsequent infections, and transfers to the hospital. Some reviewers also reported missing incident documentation and suspected a cover-up. These accounts describe harm and potential abuse and raise regulatory and safety concerns that are far more severe than routine complaints.
Staffing, culture, and management are described inconsistently. Several reviews praise particular leaders (including a named leader) and the admissions director for being proactive and communicative, and many families appreciate the personal attention and continuity of care from long-term staff members. However, other reviews say the facility has undergone management changes, price increases, and staff turnover that correspond with declines in service. Reports of staff gossiping, unprofessional behavior, rudeness, being "stressed," and medication mishandling (e.g., meds dropped on the floor) indicate variability in staff performance and morale. Some reviewers express concern about CNA ratios and overall staffing levels, which can directly affect response times and resident comfort.
Facility condition and cleanliness are also described in contradictory terms. Numerous reviewers call the building beautiful, modern, clean, and well maintained, saying there is "no nursing home smell," while others report disgusting public areas, foul odors, outdated room furniture, and rooms that smell; specific incidents include residents being allowed to lie in waste for long periods before cleanup. Housekeeping and laundry receive praise in several accounts, but housekeeping problems are also mentioned by dissatisfied families. Food and dining receive mixed feedback: several residents reportedly enjoyed meals and social dining, while a few reviews call the food "awful." The discrepancy suggests inconsistent maintenance and housekeeping standards or variability across units or shifts.
Communication, transparency, and trust are themes with both positive and negative examples. Some families praise timely updates, strong communication during emergencies (e.g., evacuations), and a welcoming admissions experience. Conversely, a number of reviews cite poor communication: hung-up calls, lack of incident documentation, and concerns about transparency (including allegations of fake reviews and removal of a resident photo wall that upset families). The presence of both strongly positive and strongly negative narratives has led some reviewers to explicitly question the authenticity of positive reviews and to encourage independent verification of claims.
Patterns and takeaways: Oak Harbor appears to deliver excellent short-term rehabilitation and has many staff and services that families appreciate, particularly therapy teams, certain nursing staff, activity programming, and some administrative leaders. However, multiple red-flag incidents reported by different reviewers — including delayed medications, neglect of basic needs, ignored alarms/calls, falls with no documentation, and subsequent infections requiring hospital transfer — are serious and warrant careful scrutiny. The reviews suggest variability in care by shift, unit, or staff team, and possible recent changes in management and pricing that some families perceive negatively.
Recommendations for families considering Oak Harbor: weigh the strong rehab and therapy track record and many positive staffing reports against the severe neglect allegations. If considering placement, visit at different times/shifts, speak directly with therapy and nursing leadership about staffing ratios, incident reporting, infection control, and turnover, request recent inspection reports and incident logs, ask for references from recent families with similar care needs, and observe cleanliness and resident interactions in person. Given the conflicting reviews and the severity of some complaints, verify current conditions and leadership stability before making a placement decision.
