Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly polarized but leans toward serious concern. A substantial number of reviews allege severe problems with care quality, sanitation, and safety — including reports of roach infestations, black mold, a history of rats, and multiple accounts of residents being left in urine and feces for extended periods. Numerous reviewers describe worsening bedsores, infections, dehydration, weight loss, missed medications (including insulin not given with meals), and delayed or absent basic care such as showers and toileting. Several reviews claim incidents were not reported properly, nursing notes were altered, and administration attempted to cover up complaints. There are also multiple alarming allegations of abuse and unprofessional conduct by staff, including inappropriate behavior by a male nurse, staff marijuana use while on duty, and cell phone use leading to inattentive care. Some reviewers go as far as linking neglect to ambulance calls and deaths, and report that the state was notified.
Staffing and management emerge as central themes. Many reviews cite chronic staff shortages — specifically too few nurses and CNAs — causing care gaps, inconsistent coverage for showers, and closures of dietary services. These shortages reportedly led to dietary lapses (meals reduced or replaced by fast food like McDonald's), inability to do laundry or provide necessary supplies (diapers, towels, wipes), and overall delayed responses to resident needs. Several reviewers also reported poor communication from management: unanswered calls, failure to return messages, mishandled discharges without paperwork or instructions, and perceived excuses from business/desk staff. Conversely, a set of reviewers praise recent leadership and certain staff members — highlighting Executive Director Natasha Johnson-Murphy, a Life Enrichment Director, Nathaniel, and CNAs such as Crystal — noting improved responsiveness, respectful treatment, and engaged care teams. This contrast suggests variability in shifts or units and possible improvements under specific leaders.
Facility conditions and maintenance are a recurring problem in negative reviews. Beyond pest issues and mold, reviewers mention broken facility infrastructure (toilets, hot rooms, TV problems), slow repair response, and housekeeping neglect leading to dirty rooms and common areas. Several accounts describe water problems that impacted dietary and laundry operations. These environmental and logistical failures compound clinical care concerns since lack of clean linens, sanitary rooms, and functioning equipment directly affect resident health and dignity.
Safety, documentation, and clinical accountability concerns are frequently raised. Reported issues include altered nursing notes, unreported resident falls, miscommunication about hospice responsibilities, inconsistent medication timing, and missed wound care or supplies that exacerbated or created pressure injuries. One or more reviewers reported alleged theft of clothes and possessions. Privacy concerns were noted at the nurse station. There are also procedural complaints such as weekly COVID testing policies being applied inconsistently or misunderstanding of respiratory symptoms leading to misattribution and delayed care.
Activities, social engagement, and therapy services receive mixed feedback but skew negative in aggregate. Multiple reviews describe limited activities, no resident outings, and a broken bus that prevented transportation. Some positive comments reference outdoor picnics and engaged residents enjoying events, and one reviewer praised the Life Enrichment Director for personal, honest, sensitive programming. Therapy services are noted as contracted rather than in-house, which some reviews mention as a concern. Overall, activity programming appears inconsistent across reports.
Dining and basic supplies show operational weaknesses in several accounts. Reviewers reported dietary closures due to lack of staff, inconsistent provision of special-diet meals (with administration sometimes intervening to fix issues), and occasional reliance on external food. Water and laundry problems, lack of diapers and wipes, and insufficient housekeeping supplies contributed to poor resident hygiene and comfort.
Variability between reviews is striking and important to emphasize. While many reports describe severe neglect, unsanitary conditions, and organizational failures, an appreciable number of reviewers report positive experiences: caring, knowledgeable staff; cleanliness; good communication; respectful treatment; and effective leadership and transitions. Named staff (Crystal, Natasha Johnson-Murphy, Nathaniel, and a praised Life Enrichment Director) appear repeatedly in positive accounts, suggesting pockets of high-quality care or recent improvements in leadership in some units or time periods. This pattern points to significant inconsistency in staff performance, management responsiveness, and day-to-day operations.
In conclusion, the review corpus indicates serious, recurring complaints about sanitation, neglect, medication and wound-care failures, staffing shortages, and alleged administrative cover-ups that pose safety and dignity concerns for residents. At the same time, there are credible positive reports highlighting dedicated staff, engaged leadership, and satisfying experiences for some families. The overall picture is one of a facility with potentially deep systemic problems and notable variability: isolated areas or staff provide good care, but multiple, severe negative reports suggest risk to residents that warrants careful scrutiny, follow-up by regulators or family advocates, and close monitoring of management and clinical practices before recommending placement without verification of resolved issues.
