Overview and overall sentiment Reviews for Focused Care at Sherman are strongly polarized. A substantial number of reviewers praise individual staff, therapy outcomes, and certain aspects of daily life, while a similarly large group reports serious and recurring deficiencies in hygiene, nutrition, safety, and administration. Positive comments emphasize caring, attentive employees and strong rehabilitation results. Negative comments describe systemic problems that can affect resident health and dignity, including filth, neglect, theft, and management failures. The mixed pattern suggests meaningful variability in resident experience depending on time, unit, shift, or individual staff assignments.
Care quality and staff behavior Many reviewers name specific staff members (for example Teressa and William) and describe CNAs, nurses, and therapists who are compassionate, responsive, and willing to go above and beyond — helping with nails on a day off, listening to family concerns, or providing personalized attention. Therapy and rehab are repeatedly highlighted as real strengths: reviewers report measurable improvements and professional, effective therapy teams. Activities programming is also frequently praised, with an active Activities Director, weekly outings, and social engagement that contribute to a positive atmosphere for some residents.
However, reviews also document inconsistent caregiving and frequent reports of untrained or unprofessional staff. Themes include rough or infrequent bathing (about once per week for some residents), staff mocking patients, removal of meal trays before residents finish, and a general tone of neglect on certain shifts (often nights and weekends). Agency staff and high turnover are mentioned repeatedly as contributing to inconsistent care. Several reviewers report explicit concerns about medication handling, including perceived medication changes intended to sedate residents and fears of medication errors.
Clinical care and safety issues Multiple reviews cite clinically significant lapses: failure to apply compression socks, development of cellulitis and edema, dramatic unintended weight gain attributed to poor diet, and poor adherence to diabetic meal plans. Safety concerns are serious and recurring: residents reportedly left unsupervised or able to leave the facility, front desk coverage absent with locked doors, and questionable fall protocols. One reviewer mentioned a resident being hospitalized and concerns about weekend emergency response. These clinical and safety issues are a key red flag for potential residents and families.
Facilities, hygiene, and personal property A stark contrast exists between reports of recent facility improvements (clean common areas, new floors, fresher paint) and reports of severe cleanliness problems in resident rooms and dining areas. Multiple reviewers describe urine odors, dried food on clothing, soiled bedding, and even roaches in food. Several accounts say residents were left lying in soiled waste. In addition to hygiene, theft and loss of personal belongings (coffee makers, fans, toiletries, clothing, dementia toys) are repeatedly raised. Such incidents contribute to distrust in facility oversight and employee vetting.
Dining and nutrition Dining receives some of the most consistent negative comments: poor food quality, very limited menus, repetitive or cold breakfasts, frequent lack of meat options or full meals, and failure to follow specialized diets (notably diabetic diets). A few reviewers state food availability has improved after prior shortages, but many still report meal dissatisfaction and weight or health consequences attributed to poor nutrition.
Management, administration, and communication Management and administrative problems are a recurrent theme. Complaints include poor record-keeping, lack of accountability, unresponsiveness to family calls, alleged double billing, and an uncaring or defensive administrator. Several reviewers describe significant variability tied to changes in management or staff turnover; some mention improvements under new management but also note that problems persist. These administrative issues amplify clinical and operational concerns and undermine family confidence.
Patterns, improvements, and recommendations Two dominant patterns emerge: (1) certain staff and departments (therapy, some nurses and CNAs, activities) deliver high-quality, compassionate care and create a positive environment; (2) systemic issues — hygiene, meal service, security, staffing levels, and management oversight — produce severe negative experiences for other residents. Some reviewers explicitly note an improved situation compared to prior periods (better food availability, cleaner common areas, new management), indicating change is possible. Yet the recurrence of very serious allegations (neglect, infection, theft, unsafe environment) suggests those improvements may be uneven or incomplete.
Conclusion Families considering Focused Care at Sherman should weigh the facility's clear strengths — especially therapy services, some highly committed staff, and active activities — against well-documented and potentially serious weaknesses in hygiene, nutrition, staffing stability, safety, and administration. Prospective residents and families should: visit multiple times including evenings and weekends, ask for inspection of resident rooms and dining, check documentation of clinical care (wound management, compression therapy, diabetic meal plans), inquire about staff-to-resident ratios and use of agency staff, review incident and theft logs, and verify management responsiveness. Where possible, speak directly to families of current residents and request references. The reviews indicate the potential for excellent care in some units or shifts, but also contain repeated, specific allegations that could materially affect a vulnerable resident's health and dignity if not addressed.
