Overall sentiment is highly polarized: reviews range from high praise for staff, therapy, activities, and cleanliness to deeply negative accounts describing neglect, serious safety lapses, and allegations of criminal behavior. A substantial number of reviews speak very positively about individual employees, the therapy team, activities programming, and a welcoming environment for short-term rehabilitation. Conversely, an alarming set of reviews details neglectful clinical care, poor hygiene, and systemic operational failures. The pattern suggests substantial variability in the resident experience that may depend on unit, shift, staff on duty, or individual resident needs.
Care quality and nursing: Many reviewers describe compassionate, attentive nurses and CNAs who go above and beyond, keep families informed, and provide effective clinical care. At the same time, a sizeable number of reviews recount serious failures: ignored call lights, long delays for medications and assistance, residents left in urine or feces, missed baths for days, wound dressings not changed timely, and inadequate bedside hygiene. There are multiple accounts of delayed or inadequate response leading to ER visits, UTIs, constipation and other adverse outcomes. Some reviewers explicitly stated they removed their loved one because they feared for their safety or health. These conflicting narratives indicate inconsistent nursing performance and likely staffing or supervisory gaps.
Therapy and rehabilitation: Physical and occupational therapy receive frequent positive comments — reviewers often report excellent PT/OT staff, substantial progress, and successful rehab outcomes. Many families singled out the therapy team as a major strength and recommended Ahava for short-term rehabilitation. However, other reviews report therapy delays, minimal or absent PT, or therapy discontinued abruptly despite progress. This inconsistency — excellent therapy for some residents and inadequate or delayed therapy for others — is a recurring theme.
Staffing, management, and communication: Understaffing is a common complaint and appears tied to many of the negative experiences (slow call responses, missed personal care, and staff burnout). Several reviews praise leadership involvement (an administrator who is a nurse, committed managers) and name individual staff who provided excellent oversight. Conversely, there are multiple reports of poor communication with families, blocked visitation or restricted access, rude or unprofessional staff (including front desk and nursing), and concerns about leadership integrity. A few reviews make very serious allegations — theft from patients, illegal activity, and a criminal investigation — and several mention missing documentation or unavailable accident reports. These are significant claims that heighten concerns about governance, oversight, and transparency.
Safety, incidents, and facility condition: Safety issues are reported repeatedly: multiple falls with injuries, inadequate fall prevention, delayed incident reporting, and near-zero security cited by some reviewers. Facility condition reports are mixed: many reviewers praise a clean, well-maintained, pleasantly scented, and updated environment while others report mold in air conditioning, raw sewage or musty odors, freezing rooms, and outdated or run-down areas. The coexistence of strong housekeeping accounts and severe cleanliness/odor complaints suggests inconsistent environmental maintenance between units or shifts.
Hygiene, laundry, and infection control: Numerous reviews raise red flags about personal hygiene and infection control: residents not bathed for days, feces/urine in hallways, urine-soaked clothing stored with clean laundry, and Pic-line dressings soiled or changed infrequently. These reports are coupled with concerns about lax infection prevention that could lead to UTIs, wound infections, or worse. Conversely, other reviewers praised daily room cleaning and viewed the building as very clean. Again, this points to substantial variability in care practices rather than uniform performance.
Dining and nutrition: Dining feedback is mixed. Some residents and families enjoy the food, pureed meals are praised, and meal service receives favorable comments. Repeated criticisms include serving sugary drinks and carb-heavy meals even for diabetic residents, and occasional issues with meal temperature or not receiving requested items (ice/water). Dietary consistency and adherence to restrictions appear to be problematic in some cases.
Activities and social programming: Life enrichment stands out as one of the most consistently positive areas. Many reviewers praise church services, art therapy, bingo, music groups, and a dedicated activities director. These programs are frequently described as fostering community, improving quality of life, and providing meaningful engagement for residents.
Notable patterns and implications: The reviews collectively suggest a facility with pockets of excellence — particularly in therapy, activities, and among certain staff members — but also recurrent operational and clinical failures that are serious and, in some cases, potentially dangerous. The variation in experiences is stark: some families describe a second home with attentive staff and rapid rehab progress, while others describe neglect, unsanitary conditions, and poor outcomes. Key recurring problem areas are understaffing, inconsistent personal care (bathing, toileting), wound care and dressing management, communication and documentation gaps, and alleged security/theft incidents. These issues appear frequently enough to indicate systemic vulnerabilities rather than isolated incidents.
In summary, Ahava Healthcare of Clarksville elicits sharply divided reviews. Strengths repeatedly mentioned are an active activities program, a strong therapy department for many residents, and numerous caring and dedicated staff members who deliver excellent, personalized care. The most serious concerns are repeated and consistent across several reviews: neglectful care episodes, under- staffing, hygiene and wound-care lapses, safety/fall incidents, poor communication, and allegations of theft or illegal activity. The combination of high praise and severe criticism suggests significant inconsistency in standards and enforcement. Families and stakeholders reviewing these patterns should weigh the positive reports about therapy and staff compassion against the documented clinical and operational failures noted in multiple reviews.
