The reviews for Woodland Manor Nursing & Rehabilitation present a deeply mixed and polarized picture. Many families and residents report excellent clinical rehabilitation outcomes, compassionate caregivers, and a small, home-like atmosphere; others describe serious neglect, safety lapses, and facility-wide cleanliness problems. A recurring pattern is that several reviewers praise therapy services, daily physical therapy and nutritious meals that led to weight gain and recovery, while an equally prominent set of reviews allege withheld medications, injuries such as bruises and bedsores, and a lack of timely explanations when incidents occur.
Care quality and clinical services are among the most frequently mentioned topics. Positive reviewers emphasize professional, goal-oriented therapy staff and effective skilled nursing that supported recovery and discharge. Those experiences often pair with satisfied family communication, social-worker updates, FaceTime contact, and visible staff engagement. Conversely, a large number of negative reviews describe poor care management, inattentive or inexperienced staff, missed medications, unattended residents, and reports of serious incidents including unexplained bruising, skin lacerations, bedsores, and at least one report of a resident found unresponsive. This split suggests inconsistent delivery of clinical care that may depend on staffing, management, or timing.
Staffing, professionalism, and management show clear contrasts across reviews. Multiple commenters praise a ‘‘new administration’’ and motivated leadership that rapidly addressed problems, improved atmosphere, painted halls, and increased staff engagement — several families say their relatives are happier and they would recommend the facility under current leadership. At the same time, other reviews accuse staff of being rude, apathetic, underpaid and overworked, or simply absent; some allege threats to ban visitors and unfair treatment of employees. The frequent mention of improvement under new management points to turnover and leadership changes being a significant factor in the variable experiences families report.
A major and consistent concern is loss, damage, or theft of personal items and laundry mishandling. Multiple reviews describe clothing that was lost, damaged by excessive bleach, or worn by others; personal items such as blankets, TV remotes, jewelry, and resident food also went missing or were eaten by staff. Several reviewers say they had to purchase replacement clothing or items out-of-pocket. These reports are repeated enough to present a pattern of poor inventory controls, lax laundry processes, and weak property-protection practices that materially affect resident dignity and family costs.
Facility condition and environmental issues are similarly inconsistent. Positive accounts describe clean, odor-free areas with activity rooms, a pleasant foyer, and outdoor features like a gazebo. Negative accounts report urine smells, sticky or filthy floors, mold on equipment (wheelchairs), roach infestations, other pests on the grounds (possums, raccoons, armadillos), leaking roofs, and insufficient cleanliness in rooms and common areas. These environmental problems raise infection-control and comfort concerns and appear to be a recurring complaint in several reviews.
Dining and activities receive mixed feedback. Many families praise nutritious meals and report their loved ones gained strength and appetite, while others cite late meals, poor kitchen performance, or even reports of resident food being taken. Activity and social opportunities are highlighted positively by some residents who made friends and felt at home; meanwhile other reviews say residents were left with no interaction, no books or TV, and little supervision. This again underscores the inconsistent resident experience across different times or units.
Communication and safety are focal concerns. Positive reviews mention clear nursing communication, regular updates from medical staff, and that families felt peace of mind. Negative reviews counter with a lack of timely communication after injuries, unanswered call lights, and staff not providing explanations for incidents — sometimes prompting involvement of an ombudsman. Several reviews mention dangerous outcomes (pressure ulcers, bruising, unexplained deterioration) that families viewed as signs of neglect rather than isolated lapses.
Overall, Woodland Manor appears to have a split reputation: some families and residents report compassionate, effective care, strong therapy programs, and marked improvement under new leadership; a substantial number of others report systemic issues — lost possessions and laundry errors, cleanliness and pest problems, staffing shortages and unprofessional behavior, poor communication, and serious safety incidents. The consistent themes across the negative reviews (theft/laundry problems, cleanliness/pest issues, medication and injury concerns, and staffing instability) are significant and recurring, while the positive themes (skilled rehab, caring staff, home-like environment, and managerial improvements) are equally emphatic. Prospective families should consider asking specific, time-bound questions about current leadership tenure, staffing ratios, laundry and personal property protocols, incident reporting and communication policies, infection control/pest remediation, and recent inspection or ombudsman reports. Observing the facility in person, requesting references from recent families, and verifying recent changes under new management will help determine whether the improvements others report are sustained and whether the important concerns about safety, possessions, and cleanliness have been resolved.
