Overall sentiment across the reviews is highly polarized: many families and residents praise Woodway Rehabilitation & Healthcare Center for its rehabilitation services, caring clinical staff, cleanliness, and good communication, while a substantial number of reviewers report serious concerns about neglect, mismanagement, and unsafe care practices. The amount and severity of negative reports — including being left in urine or feces, delayed medications, alleged theft, laundry damage, and administrative failures — contrast sharply with positive accounts of compassionate caregivers, an excellent therapy team, and a welcoming facility. This split suggests inconsistent performance across shifts, units, or staff, with some experiences being exemplary and others deeply problematic.
Care quality and safety emerge as the single most important theme. Positive reviews highlight attentive, compassionate caregivers, consistent assistance, and effective rehabilitation that helped patients regain function. Multiple reviewers specifically commend the therapy team (PT/OT/ST), citing skilled therapists, patient training, and family education. However, numerous negative reports describe unresponsiveness to call lights, inadequate toileting assistance, residents left in soiled beds or clothing for extended periods, delayed or missed pain medications, and even incidents leading to emergency transfers or hospice involvement. There are also troubling accounts of falls and bedsores, and at least one allegation of sedation without consent. These safety and neglect concerns are serious and recurrent in the negative reviews, indicating potential systemic issues rather than isolated events.
Staff and interpersonal interactions are another area of divergence. Many reviewers praise nurses, aides, front desk staff, and specific employees (named or described) for being courteous, communicative, and supportive of families. The facility is credited in several accounts with open communication, good family advocacy, and teamwork among clinical staff. Conversely, other reviews describe staff as rude, passive-aggressive, dismissive, or distracted (on phones). Some clinicians — notably social workers and certain physical therapists — are accused of being condescending or impatient. There are reports of staff arguing with family members, refusing reasonable requests (such as bedside potty assistance), and prioritizing freeing up beds over patient readiness. This mixed portrayal points to uneven staff training, morale, and accountability.
Management and leadership are frequently criticized in negative reviews. Complaints include administrators who are "too busy" to discuss concerns, leadership described as clueless or ineffective, and an admitted culture of decline per an alleged administrator comment. Families report inconsistent policy knowledge among staff, poor oversight of operations (laundry errors, missing items, theft), and difficulty resolving billing or admission paperwork issues (including a contested $5,000 account dispute). High staff turnover and apparent understaffing are cited as contributors to the lower-quality experiences, with some reviewers explicitly connecting short staffing to neglectful care and rapid discharge practices.
Facility, cleanliness, dining, and activities receive mostly positive remarks with important exceptions. Several reviewers repeatedly note the facility is very clean, pleasant-smelling, and well-maintained, and they praise private suites, visitor amenities, and engaging activities. Many families appreciate the meals, describing them as delicious and nutritious with reasonable dietary accommodations and helpful staff during mealtimes. Nevertheless, other accounts call the food "marginal" or unacceptable to some residents, and there are multiple operational failures related to laundry and personal belongings (missing photos/frames, damaged clothes, stolen jacket). These operational lapses undermine otherwise positive impressions of physical upkeep and programming.
Administrative, procedural, and communication issues are mixed. Positive reports emphasize open communication, swift responses to questions, effective COVID-era protocols, and strong family inclusion in care decisions. Negative reports describe inconsistent policies on visitation and sign-in, confusing responsibilities among staff, delayed admissions processes, and poor transparency about residents' belongings and finances. Several reviewers recount extensive difficulty reaching administrators or resolving disputes, suggesting that families may have very different experiences depending on who they interact with and when.
Patterns and notable recommendations: the reviews collectively indicate a facility capable of providing outstanding rehabilitation and compassionate care in many cases, but also one that has recurring and sometimes severe lapses in basic care, safety, and management. The variability appears linked to staffing levels, leadership effectiveness, and possibly different units or shifts within the facility. For prospective residents or family members: conduct an in-person tour, ask specific questions about staffing ratios, response times to call lights, incident reporting and resolution, laundry and property safeguards, medication administration protocols, and leadership stability. Request to meet therapy staff if rehabilitation is a primary goal and verify how they document and communicate care plans. If considering placement, insist on clear written policies for visitation, belongings, billing, and escalation procedures for concerns. Given the number of serious allegations in the negative reviews (neglect, abuse, theft, medication delays, and inadequate toileting), families should remain vigilant, maintain frequent contact, and consider alternate placement if they observe systemic problems or receive unsatisfactory responses from management.
