The reviews for Memorial City Nursing and Rehabilitation Center are strongly polarized, revealing a facility with notable strengths in rehabilitation and pockets of highly compassionate staff, but also with repeated, serious operational and safety concerns. Many families and short-stay rehab patients praise the therapy services: physical, occupational, and speech therapy are repeatedly described as excellent, thorough, and effective (including reports of twice-daily treatments and 6x/week therapy). Several reviewers credit the therapists and rehab staff with meaningful functional improvements. Admissions, business office personnel, certain administrators, and named individual staff (nurses, CNAs, activity leaders) receive high marks in multiple reviews for being welcoming, communicative, and helpful. The activity program and gym are highlighted as robust in positive accounts, and some wings or short-term/rehab units are described as clean, organized, and well-run.
However, a substantial portion of reviews report recurring and severe deficits in daily nursing care, housekeeping, and safety. Common themes include chronic understaffing, especially on nights and weekends, resulting in long delays answering call lights and delayed assistance for toileting, bathing, wound care, and medication administration. Multiple accounts describe residents being left soiled for hours, urine and feces odors, stained linens, and other unacceptable hygiene issues. Pest problems (roaches, ants, spiders, and at least one report of a rat) and inconsistent room maintenance (peeling bathroom floors, broken furniture, missing curtain/outlet covers) are frequently mentioned. These environmental and care deficits are sometimes concentrated in long-term care wings while short-term rehab units receive better reviews, indicating variability by unit and shift.
Serious clinical concerns are described in several reviews and should be noted: reports of missed or refused medications (including insulin management lapses), incorrect diabetic diets, delayed oxygen administration, delayed or inadequate wound/vac care, infections from feeding tube management, and at least one review alleging a death or serious decline related to care issues. Emergency response problems recur (slow or no response to alarms, delayed ambulance/transport coordination), and reviewers report defensive or unhelpful interactions with administration when raising concerns. There are multiple allegations concerning billing: unexpected large balances, disputed charges, advice to request itemized bills, and several claims framed as possible Medicaid/Medicare billing irregularities — those are presented by reviewers as allegations rather than verified findings.
Communication and management responsiveness appear inconsistent. Positive reviews describe clear, frequent communication from nursing leadership, social work and therapy teams; negative reviews describe unreturned social worker calls, administrators being unavailable or dismissive, form-letter responses, and poor follow-through during discharge planning. Families report variability in staff professionalism — while some employees are described as warm, empathic and proactive, others are accused of rudeness, taunting residents, sleeping on shift, or failing to wear proper nametags. Several reviewers recommended families be persistent, closely monitor care, and verify items like insulin administration, wound checks, and billing. Privacy breaches and staff sharing other patients' personal information are also noted in some accounts.
Dining and housekeeping receive mixed but frequently critical comments: many reviewers complain about poor-quality, cold, or overly starchy meals, insufficient portions for special diets (e.g., diabetic requirements), and frequent reliance on outside meals brought by families. Housekeeping is inconsistent — some common areas are praised as clean and waxed while others report trash left for weeks, dead cockroaches, and limited or no night cleaning. Maintenance and safety issues (uneven sidewalks, broken pots, unsafe-looking wiring, sharps storage concerns) are called out and compound worries for resident safety.
Overall sentiment is sharply divided. For patients admitted for focused rehabilitation, Memorial City is often rated highly and recommended for its therapy outcomes and some high-performing staff. For long-term residents or those with higher nursing needs, a pattern of concerning reports emerges: erratic nursing care, hygiene failures, pest and maintenance problems, potential medication and emergency response lapses, and communication/billing problems. The repeated juxtaposition of excellent individual caregivers and teams with systemic problems suggests that leadership, staffing levels, and unit-level management strongly influence resident experience.
If evaluating this facility, readers should be aware of the variability in reported experiences. Positive indicators include an active therapy program, engaged activity staff, and individual employees who are repeatedly praised. Red flags to investigate during a tour and before placement include evidence of pest control, cleanliness of resident rooms and bathrooms, nurse-to-resident ratios on nights/weekends, call light response times, diabetic and medication management protocols, wound care consistency, and transparent billing practices. Families who chose to keep loved ones at the facility often report needing to be persistent advocates and to verify clinically important items (insulin, wound vac management, discharge plans). Finally, several reviews allege serious neglect and billing improprieties — these are serious claims that warrant verification through direct observation, review of state inspection reports, and discussion with facility leadership and the patient's clinical team.
