The reviews present a mixed but concerning picture of Lake Worth Nursing Home. On the positive side, several reviewers describe friendly staff and a generally nice physical facility. Some comments indicate that particular units can "function as a unit," producing a cohesive team atmosphere, and at least a few residents or family members found their experiences "extremely rewarding". There is also mention of interest in increasing resident involvement, which suggests some engagement opportunities or desire for more resident-centered activities.
However, the negative themes are numerous and include both administrative and clinical safety concerns. Communication failures are prominent: reviewers report no return calls, a nonworking phone number, and very limited administrative hours (one comment indicating services or contact only on Wednesdays). Social worker turnover is noted, and families describe ignored or delayed transfer requests. These administrative shortcomings appear to compound other problems and contribute to family frustration and a perception of neglectful management.
Clinical and safety issues are particularly alarming in the summaries. Reports include bed sores and at least one severe infection, which are indicators of potentially inadequate clinical monitoring or nursing care. There are explicit statements about "unsafe care" and "neglectful management," and one reviewer offers a strong warning to others. Additionally, reviewers reported a poor response to a fall: staff seemed unaware of what happened and did not adequately address the incident. Taken together, these points indicate inconsistent or potentially substandard clinical oversight that could place vulnerable residents at risk.
Facility capacity and services are also criticized. Overcrowded rooms — up to five residents per room in one report — raise concerns about privacy, infection control, and overall living conditions. Several reviewers complained about the quality of dining, describing the food as "horrible." There are also complaints about lack of therapy services, which is important for rehabilitation and maintaining resident function. These facility- and service-level deficiencies suggest that while the building may be "nice" in some respects, operational limitations are negatively affecting resident experience.
Staffing has a dual portrayal: while frontline employees are described as friendly by some reviewers, there are also mentions of high turnover in key administrative roles (social worker) and staff being unaware of incidents. This juxtaposition points to a possible distinction between individual caregivers who are compassionate and systemic problems in training, supervision, handoff, or leadership. Inconsistent staffing and turnover in critical administrative roles can undermine continuity of care and make it harder for families to get reliable information or timely responses.
Overall, the reviews signal a facility with pockets of good interpersonal care but with significant and recurring issues around communication, management, safety, and essential services. The most serious red flags are reports of bed sores, severe infection, neglectful management, ignored transfer requests, and inadequate responses to falls. Prospective residents and families should weigh the positive remarks about friendly staff and cohesive units against these serious concerns, and consider additional due diligence (inspections, up-to-date state reports, in-person visits, and direct questioning about staffing, infection control, therapy availability, and incident reporting) before making placement decisions.
