Overall sentiment: The reviews for Country Care Manor are predominantly positive, with numerous reviewers emphasizing a consistently caring and compassionate staff, strong therapy and rehabilitation services, and a very clean, well-organized facility. Many families reported peace of mind because their loved ones appeared comfortable, well-cared-for, and engaged. At the same time, a smaller but significant subset of reviews describe communication breakdowns, management concerns, and isolated clinical or operational lapses that temper the overwhelmingly favorable impressions.
Care quality and clinical services: A clear strength across the reviews is the clinical and therapeutic care. Multiple reviewers praised the therapy department (PT/OT/speech) and wound care services, citing tangible rehab outcomes such as patients walking again with walkers after fractures. Nurses and nursing aides are repeatedly described as attentive and competent, and reviewers mentioned effective clinical decision-making when staff (e.g., a nurse) contacted families and advised ER transfer in urgent situations. The facility’s therapy and nursing teams are often singled out as reasons families would recommend Country Care Manor.
Staff, culture, and standout employees: Staff behavior and culture receive extensive praise. Reviewers described staff as kind, compassionate, professional, and family-like; several individual employees were named positively (Amanda, Monica, Jimmy, Blanca, Mikayla), indicating that staff members form meaningful relationships with residents and families. Comments note long-tenured residents and staff, which supports impressions of continuity and a welcoming environment. Maintenance and housekeeping are viewed as responsive, contributing to a perception of a well-run and cared-for place.
Facility, cleanliness, security, and COVID handling: Many reviews emphasize the facility’s cleanliness, fresh smells, and lack of urine odor—sometimes described as the nicest facility reviewers had seen in a long time. Security and entrance screening procedures are repeatedly praised; families were reassured by screening measures and orderly COVID protocols. Several reviewers specifically noted daily COVID updates, limited resumption of activities in a controlled manner, and professional handling of the pandemic lockdown—actions that increased family confidence during stressful periods.
Activities, dining, and services: Reviewers commonly appreciate the social programming, crafts, puzzles, and mealtime fellowship. Activities were described as ongoing (with some pandemic-related restrictions) and staff often greeted visitors and invited participation. Dining received positive feedback for variety and multiple dinner options. On-site amenities such as the hair salon were noted and anticipated to reopen, and reviewers appreciated small conveniences like available water in the dining hall when the fountain was off.
Communication, management, and operational concerns: While many families reported good communication and prompt updates from nurses and office staff, a pattern of inconsistent communication emerges in other reviews. Specific complaints include lack of administrator response to concerns, delayed or absent notification when personal items went missing (a lost wallet), and in one case an extended period (about two weeks) without timely staff contact while a patient deteriorated and later required ER care for pneumonia and sepsis. A few reviewers reported unprofessional interactions (a “snide” social worker) and broader concerns about management responsiveness.
Staffing, pay, and continuity issues: Several reviews mentioned staffing concerns: use of temporary aides, perceived staffing shortages, and reports of low pay or misquoted wages. These issues were framed as contributing to turnover and morale problems, and one review explicitly linked management unprofessionalism to dissatisfaction about pay. While many families experienced attentive and consistent staffing, these comments suggest variability in staffing continuity that could affect care consistency for some residents.
Visitor restrictions and isolated negative incidents: One notable policy-related complaint involved a strict ban on visitors under 18, which at least one reviewer rated so negatively it produced a one-star review despite otherwise positive comments. Other isolated negative incidents include loss of personal belongings without prompt notification and a behavioral concern about night staff smoking and leaving cigarettes on the entrance bench. These incidents are not widespread in the reviews but are significant to the families who experienced them.
Net impression and recommendations: In aggregate, Country Care Manor receives strong praise for compassionate staff, excellent therapy and rehab services, cleanliness, security, and an engaging activities program. Most families expressed trust in the facility and gratitude for the care their loved ones received. However, prospective residents and families should be aware of the mixed reports around administrative communication, possible staffing variability, visitor restriction policies, and a few isolated but serious incidents. It would be prudent for families to ask specific questions during tours or admissions about administrator responsiveness, staffing ratios and continuity, personal belongings policies, visitor rules (especially regarding minors), and how the facility documents and communicates clinical changes to families so they can gauge consistency between the generally high level of care reported and the less frequent negative experiences described.
