Overall sentiment across reviews is mixed but strongly polarized. A substantial portion of reviewers praise Mt Pleasant Health & Rehab Center for its compassionate staff, hands-on leadership, and effective rehabilitation services. Many families describe a home-like, family atmosphere and say staff treat residents like family. Therapy teams and nursing staff are frequently credited with helping patients regain function, manage pain, and discharge home successfully; one reviewer noted a neurosurgeon was impressed with progress. Multiple reviewers single out leadership by name, citing the administrator Charmaine (Charmaine Brown) and a supportive DON as driving positive culture change and improved morale. Several reviewers emphasize cleanliness, well-run dining, engaging activities, and ongoing facility improvements and remodeling that have modernized parts of the building and amenities such as TVs and Wi‑Fi.
At the same time, there are serious and recurrent concerns reported by other families that contradict the positive accounts. The most severe allegations include medication mishandling culminating in an overdose treated with NARCAN and a family assertion that medications were missed or not administered as documented. There are multiple accounts of long call-light response times—one reviewer reported waits of an hour to an hour and a half—and examples of delayed assistance for basic needs (vomit left unattended, catheter bags overfull, patients left without help to use the bathroom). Several reviewers describe instances of neglect or safety lapses such as unattended falls and a loved one ending up in the ICU, prompting moves to other facilities.
Facility condition and maintenance appear uneven. Many reviewers state the building is clean and well-maintained under new leadership, while others describe run-down rooms with nonworking lights, water-damaged AC units, worn mattresses with deep depressions, missing bedside furniture, broken wheelchairs, no commodes, and missing call buttons. These maintenance and equipment issues materially affect safety and dignity. Hygiene lapses are also reported in some accounts—beds not changed for days, bad smells, wet floors and spills—contrasting with other reports of good housekeeping. The presence of older sections of the facility and shared bathrooms for some rooms were noted as drawbacks by several reviewers.
Staffing and consistency are a common theme linking many of the negative reports. Reviewers cite use of temporary or agency staff, low wages, long staff commutes, and frequent turnover as factors that likely contribute to inconsistent care quality and communication breakdowns. Some reviewers report staff being distracted (on phones), lazy, or failing to perform assigned tasks; others praise staff responsiveness and organization. This variability suggests that experiences are highly dependent on which caregivers are scheduled and whether management oversight is present at a given time.
Management and communication perceptions are split. Numerous families praise visible, accessible leadership, responsive administrators, and proactive communication; several reviews attribute substantive positive change to new management. Conversely, a subset of reviews claims that complaints were dismissed or that the administrator was unhelpful, and one reviewer said they were required to clean their family member’s room or change bedding themselves. These divergent views point to possible improvements over time but also to lingering issues or episodic failures in complaint resolution and family engagement.
Clinical care and rehabilitation stand out as strengths in many accounts: effective therapy, coordinated medical teams including onsite physicians and nurse practitioners, and instances of staff going above and beyond clinically. Dining and activities generally receive positive comments—spacious dining room, good food, and active programming that keeps residents engaged. However, multiple reviewers flag the facility is not a dementia specialist and that it may lack specialized programming or staffing to meet advanced dementia care needs.
In summary, Mt Pleasant Health & Rehab Center elicits both strong endorsements and serious criticisms. Positive reviews focus on compassionate staff, effective rehab outcomes, and improved environment and leadership, often naming administrators and nursing leaders as assets. Negative reviews raise red flags about medication safety, inconsistent responsiveness, staffing reliability, maintenance and hygiene issues, and episodic neglect. These patterns suggest a facility in transition: notable improvements and strong teams are present and visible to many families, but persistent or episodic operational and safety failures remain for others. Families considering this facility should ask specific, recent questions about staffing consistency, medication administration protocols, call-light response times, dementia programming if needed, and recent inspection or complaint resolutions. Visiting on multiple days/shifts and speaking directly with leadership about any prior incidents and corrective actions would help assess whether the positive changes are sustained and whether concerns raised in negative reviews have been adequately addressed.
