Overall sentiment across reviews is highly mixed, with strongly positive firsthand praise for the physical facility, dining, activities, and many individual staff members paired with substantive, recurring criticisms about operational reliability, management, and clinical care. Multiple reviewers describe the Blake at Carnes Crossroads as a beautiful, new, resort-like community with spacious rooms, appealing common areas (patio, fountain, courtyard), and desirable amenities such as a salon, movie theater, therapy room, and an accessible van. Dining receives considerable positive attention: several reviewers report restaurant-style service, customizable menus, fresh fruit and produce, low-sodium options, and highly praised chefs. The activities program is another consistent strength in many accounts, with an active calendar that includes bingo, crafts, music, concerts, cooking classes, outings, prayer groups, and resident-led events. Numerous reviewers emphasize a warm, family-like atmosphere and single out specific staff and activities leaders (several by name) for creating a welcoming social environment and fostering residents' engagement and vitality.
However, those positive attributes coexist with repeated and serious operational and clinical concerns. Staffing shortages, frequent turnover, and reliance on temporary agency staff are recurring themes that reviewers link to degraded day-to-day care. Reports of missed or delayed medications, medication mismanagement around surgeries and vacations, and in some cases medications going missing are common across multiple summaries. Several reviewers describe residents being left unattended—particularly in memory care—ignored call buttons, infrequent night checks (12-hour gaps cited), and instances of residents sitting unsupervised in front of a TV or escaping. There are multiple mentions of what families perceive as negligence (including at least one reviewer attributing a death to negligence) and poor follow-up or communication from management and corporate leadership after adverse events.
Management and communication are polarizing. Many reviewers praise individual managers and staff for compassion and responsiveness, whereas a substantial set of reports describe poor management follow-through, lack of responsiveness to emails and phone calls, billing problems (charging for rehab or an empty room), and a sense that corporate priorities favor revenue over resident well-being. Some reviewers report an observable decline in care and kindness after staff departures or a corporate changeover. Several families recommended constant advocacy, arranging private sitters, or installing cameras because they did not trust institutional oversight. Security and safety concerns also appear: leaking plants near elevators, unresolved theft (jewelry), mold or biohazard disposal issues in isolated reports, and complaints about staff yelling or unprofessional behavior.
Service consistency is a major dividing line in these reviews. Where staffing is stable and specific caregivers are present, families report excellent care, good hygiene, on-schedule laundry, and thriving residents. Where turnover or temporary staff dominate, reviewers recount missed meds, irregular laundry, poor housekeeping (beds urine-soaked, dirty rooms), and inadequate assistance with activities of daily living. Memory care perceptions vary: some families praise well-designed engagement and stimulation for dementia residents and say their loved ones improved and thrived, while others assert memory care neglect, improper medication administration, and that the community is not suitable for higher-functioning dementia patients. Dining also shows variance by unit—assisted living often gets higher marks for restaurant-style dining than memory care in a few accounts.
Cost and value are frequent concerns. Many reviewers call the community expensive and report additional, unexpected fees (eg toilet paper, rehab charges), leading to perceptions of overpricing relative to the level or consistency of care. Several reviews explicitly advise against choosing the Blake if expecting reliable clinical oversight, while many others highly recommend it for its amenities, staff, and social life. Taken together, the reviews point to a facility that can deliver an excellent living environment and active lifestyle when staffing levels and leadership are functioning well, but that also shows significant risk of lapses in clinical care, communication, safety, and basic operations when turnover and management problems occur. Prospective families should weigh the attractive amenities and strong activity/dining programs against the reported variability in clinical reliability, ask detailed questions about current staffing stability, medication procedures, incident reporting, and oversight (including camera policies), and consider arranging additional private support or closer monitoring if their loved one has higher care needs or memory impairment.
