Overview and overall sentiment: Reviews for Princeton Transitional Care are highly polarized. A substantial portion of reviewers praise the facility for its rehabilitation services, therapy teams, supportive case management, attractive physical environment, and compassionate staff on many shifts. At the same time, a significant number of reviews report serious clinical and operational problems — including neglectful care, staffing shortages, poor communication, medication and paperwork errors, hygiene lapses, and safety incidents. Taken together, the reviews suggest that individual experiences depend heavily on which staff members and shifts a resident encounters; the facility appears capable of providing excellent rehab-centered care in many cases but has recurrent and significant lapses in consistent execution and supervision.
Care quality & clinical safety: Therapy services (PT/OT/Speech) are one of the most consistently praised aspects. Multiple reviews credit therapists with substantive gains in mobility and independence, and several staff members are named specifically for positive impact. Conversely, nursing and basic care are the areas most frequently criticized. There are repeated reports of delayed or missed medications, very slow responses to call lights, and a lack of RN availability. More serious clinical concerns appear in several reviews: weight loss, malnutrition, non-healing pressure ulcers, UTIs, and transfers to hospital for escalation (including for feeding support). Some family reports describe falls that were not always properly reported or followed up on, and at least one review alleges a major lifting/dropping incident. These clinical safety issues are serious red flags that indicate gaps in vigilance, staffing, and oversight in certain situations or units.
Staffing, communication & leadership: A common theme is inconsistent staffing and responsiveness. Many reviewers explicitly call out understaffing on nights, weekends, and holidays, with consequent long delays for assistance and varying staff morale. Communication with families is highly variable: some reviewers praise a compassionate, helpful case manager (Heather is repeatedly named and complimented), and positive mentions of an engaged administrator (Jason) and certain DON/ADON presence occur. Other families experienced no notifications about significant events, poor explanations of injuries or incidents, unreturned calls, and defensiveness when raising concerns. There are numerous reports of administrative failures around discharge planning — missing notes, failure to arrange home health, and misrepresentation of agency options — which created stress and in some cases additional hospital transfers or readmissions.
Facilities, cleanliness & amenities: Many reviewers describe the facility as new, attractive, and clean on arrival, with private suites, courtyard access, windows, kitchenettes, and a pleasant atmosphere. Activity programming and social offerings are appreciated. However, cleanliness and housekeeping appear inconsistent: several reviews describe rooms becoming dirty (sticky floors, overflowing trash), stained sheets, laundry lost or sent to an incorrect facility, and inadequate bathing. Maintenance issues such as nonfunctional room phones and windowless isolation rooms were also reported. The divergence between the facility’s appealing design and some accounts of lapses in daily care/housekeeping contributes to the polarized impressions.
Dining & nutrition: Dining impressions are mixed. Some residents praised delicious meals and good dining service; others described food as horrendous, poor quality, or overcooked and noted limited meal choice. Given reports of weight loss, malnutrition and feeding challenges in a subset of residents, dining quality and nutrition support may be an area to probe further for residents with complex dietary or feeding needs.
Infection control & policies: Several reviewers raised infection-control concerns, including cases where residents contracted pneumonia or COVID during stays and reports of staff refusing to wear masks. Families also reported restrictive visitation policies in certain situations (quarantine and confinement notices for unvaccinated visitors), which, combined with inconsistent communication, produced distress. These issues suggest variability in adherence to infection-prevention protocols and policy communication.
Patterns of praise vs. concern & names repeatedly mentioned: Positive patterns: excellent rehabilitation outcomes with committed therapy teams, compassionate and skilled nurses/CNAs on many shifts, clean and modern facility features, and a frequently praised case manager (Heather) and some administrative staff (Jason, Deanna for equipment). Negative patterns: inconsistent nursing care, understaffing, slow call responses, medication and paperwork errors, hygiene and wound-care failures in some cases, and defensive or unresponsive leadership when serious issues are raised. Multiple reviews explicitly compare Princeton unfavorably to other local rehab options (Quillen Rehab cited by more than one reviewer), indicating that some families found better consistency elsewhere.
Practical considerations and recommendations for families: - Expect variability: many positive rehab outcomes are reported, but families should plan for variability by asking specific questions about staffing ratios, RN coverage, weekend/night coverage, and recent quality metrics before admission. - Ask about wound care and nutrition protocols: given repeated reports of pressure ulcers, weight loss, and feeding escalation, families with medically complex or frail loved ones should verify wound-care expertise, feeding assistance policies, and monitoring procedures. - Confirm discharge and home-health plans in writing: reviewers reported missing discharge documentation and failures to arrange home health; insist on a clear written discharge plan and contact information for follow-up care. - Communicate expectations and escalation pathways: identify the case manager (Heather is frequently mentioned positively) and the administrator, document concerns immediately, and ask how complaints are escalated. - Visit and observe during multiple shifts if possible: because staff performance appears shift-dependent, a short daytime tour may not reflect the patient’s overnight experience.
Bottom line: Princeton Transitional Care can provide high-quality, therapy-focused rehabilitation in many cases, supported by a modern facility and several standout staff members. However, the body of reviews also contains multiple, serious complaints about inconsistent nursing care, understaffing, communication failures, safety and hygiene lapses, and administrative breakdowns. Families should weigh the facility’s strong rehabilitation reputation against the reported variability in basic nursing and safety practices, and take proactive steps to verify staffing, care protocols, and discharge arrangements before and during a stay.







