Overall impression Franklin Park Boerne elicits a broadly positive but mixed response from reviewers. A large number of families and residents praise the community for its beautiful, new/resort-like facility, well-kept grounds, and strong social programming. Many reviewers highlight warm, caring, and personable staff, an engaged activities team, a sense of community among residents, and excellent meals — all of which contribute to frequent recommendations and high satisfaction for many residents. At the same time, recurring criticisms—especially around staffing consistency, some lapses in clinical responsiveness, and concerns in memory care—create a divergent picture that prospective families should probe carefully during a tour and follow-up conversations.
Care quality and staff A dominant theme is the quality of the caregiving staff: numerous reviews describe staff as attentive, compassionate, and willing to go above and beyond for residents. Families report clear communication, personalized attention, and an atmosphere that makes them feel comfortable leaving loved ones in the community’s care. Several reviewers singled out specific employees and directors (including activity and memory care directors) as exceptional, citing quick resolution of problems, proactive follow-up, and strong family-inclusive care. However, there is also a persistent undercurrent of staffing instability. Many reviews note high turnover, inconsistent coverage, and shifts where caregivers appear distracted or unavailable (phones, short-staffed floors). These staffing issues have translated, in some cases, to slow response times to medical needs, missed or delayed care tasks (laundry, bathroom cleaning), and perceptions of unqualified or minimally trained staff. A few serious reports describe clinicians not addressing medical issues for multiple days, overmedication concerns, and allegations of mistreatment or unprofessional behavior—issues that families must weigh heavily.
Facilities, maintenance, and safety Franklin Park’s physical plant is frequently praised: brand-new or recent construction, attractive interiors, private bathrooms, courtyard views, and resort-like landscaping. Amenities such as a salon, barber, exercise room, computer room, and on-site clinicians add convenience. That said, several reviewers raised construction and maintenance concerns: cheap cabinetry, shortcuts during build-out, water leaks during heavy rain, and a few hallways with cleanliness or water-damage issues. Safety is a mixed picture: while many reviewers felt secure and noted the emphasis on resident safety and companionship, others reported serious safety lapses—wandering residents, unlocked rooms, and flight-risk cases that required moving a resident to memory care. Additionally, assisted living residents’ lack of direct outdoor access (no enclosed outdoor area) was repeatedly noted as a limitation.
Dining and housekeeping Dining receives strong nods from many families — “excellent,” “amazing,” and “customizable” appear frequently — with specific praise for menu variety, special dietary accommodations, and an improving food program under a new food director and food committee. Compliments include special meals, holiday events, and attentive dining staff. Conversely, some reviewers found the breakfast repetitive, noted portions or food availability issues during large events, and mentioned instances where meals didn’t match residents’ eating abilities (concerning for memory-care residents). Housekeeping is generally seen as regular and reliable (weekly housekeeping cited), though isolated reports exist of laundry or cleaning tasks being missed.
Activities and social life One of the centerpieces of positive feedback is the robust activity schedule: painting, balloon toss, exercise classes, yoga, trips, live music, games, and frequent outings. Multiple reviewers credit the activity directors with creating engagement and purpose for residents, helping many form friendships and develop a real sense of community. At the same time, the quality of activity programming appears tied to staffing stability—where staff shortages or turnover occur, reviews describe empty activity rooms, less stimulation, and residents left alone. Memory-care activities were praised by several reviewers, but other families criticized memory care as lacking or poorly staffed in certain instances.
Management, communication, and leadership Feedback on management and leadership is polarized. Many reviewers appreciate responsive management, immediate issue resolution, transparent communication, and directors who genuinely engage with families. Others feel management is absent on the floor, slow to respond, or ineffective at holding staff accountable. A small number of reviews make serious accusations about discriminatory or abusive behavior by leadership or staff, which prospective families should follow up on directly. Several reviewers noted that management is aware of staffing challenges and is actively trying to address them, suggesting improvements over time in some metrics (e.g., stabilization after early turnover and an improving food program).
Cost, billing, and contract issues Price and affordability are common concerns—many describe Franklin Park as expensive, with rising rent and additional fees (premium charges for courtyard view rooms, extra charges for incontinent care). Several reviewers felt the community offered good value for the services provided, while others cautioned that the cost may exceed mid-range budgets. Families should clarify fee structures, extra charges, and what is included in base pricing.
Notable patterns and recommendations Strengths of Franklin Park Boerne are most evident for residents who want an active, social community in a high-quality physical setting with caring staff and a strong activities program. The community appears particularly well-suited for residents with moderate assistance needs who will benefit from robust social programming, good dining, and a welcoming environment. Concerns cluster around staffing consistency, occasional clinical lapses, memory-care variability, and a few maintenance and management issues. These concerns are significant enough that prospective residents—especially those needing higher medical oversight or memory care—should take the following steps: 1) schedule multiple visits at different times/days to observe staffing on shifts and activity participation; 2) ask for specific staffing ratios, turnover statistics, and clinical response time examples; 3) review the contract for extra fees (incontinent care, courtyard premium, etc.) and escalation/complaint procedures; 4) inquire about enclosed outdoor access for assisted-living residents and specific safety protocols for wandering/flight-risk residents; and 5) request references from current families with residents in the same level of care.
Bottom line Franklin Park Boerne earns high marks for its environment, many compassionate staff members, and an active social program that creates a strong community feel for many residents. However, inconsistent staffing, mixed reports about clinical responsiveness and memory care, and some facility/management shortcomings introduce variability in experience. For families considering Franklin Park, the community can be an excellent fit if the current staffing stability, memory-care approach, safety procedures, and fee structure align with the prospective resident’s needs—so thorough, targeted due diligence during touring and follow-up is essential.
