The compiled reviews for Promise Skilled Nursing Facility of Wichita Falls present a strongly mixed and polarized picture. On one hand, several reviewers praise individual staff members and certain clinical interactions: staff are described as detail-oriented, calm during crises, attentive to individual needs, and polite. Some accounts explicitly characterize the facility as providing "very good care" and even call it the best skilled nursing facility in Wichita Falls. These positive comments emphasize moments of competent, compassionate bedside care and staff who respond well under pressure.
Conversely, a substantial number of summaries raise serious clinical, safety, environmental, and administrative concerns. Multiple reviewers report unsafe or poor nursing care, including incorrect medication administration and an instance described as a "deadly infection." There are allegations that residents were discharged without appropriate at-home care arrangements, which indicates failures in discharge planning and continuity of care. Administrative mismanagement and assertions that the facility is "not trustworthy" recur across summaries. Collectively, these points suggest systemic issues rather than isolated incidents for some families.
Clinical capability and staffing are recurring themes. Reviewers note there is no on-site respiratory therapist and express confusion about the facility's intended level of service — specifically staffing coverage and whether the site functions as an LTAC (long-term acute care) or a standard skilled nursing facility (SNF). Several reviews explicitly state it is "not a LTAC" and may be more like a nursing home, implying a mismatch between patient needs and available services. Additional clinical-safety concerns include reports of lack of patient monitors and a "horrible doctor," which raise red flags about medical oversight and monitoring for higher-acuity residents.
Facility condition and resident comfort are also concerns. Summaries describe the plant as dirty and run down, with at least one report of rooms lacking a bathroom. Dining issues are mentioned specifically: lunches served after 1:00 pm and residents described as sick and "starving." These details point to lapses in basic resident care, environmental maintenance, and meal service routines that affect daily quality of life.
Overall sentiment is heavily mixed, with a clear divide between reviews praising individual caregivers and reviews alleging serious failures in care, safety, and management. The pattern suggests variability in experience that could stem from differences between shifts, units, or changes over time (for example, staffing shortages or administrative problems affecting some patients but not others). Key recurring risks highlighted by reviewers are medication errors, infection control problems, insufficient clinical resources for higher-acuity patients (particularly respiratory support and monitoring), inadequate discharge planning, and substandard cleanliness and facilities.
For prospective residents or families, these reviews indicate the importance of verifying current staffing levels, on-site clinical resources (respiratory therapist, monitoring equipment), infection-control records, discharge-planning protocols, and physician coverage before admission. In-person tours should include inspection of room amenities (bathroom presence), cleanliness, meal timetables, and direct questions about how the facility manages higher-acuity patients and shift-to-shift continuity. While there are reports of compassionate, competent staff, the documented clinical and administrative shortcomings are significant enough that due diligence and specific, targeted questions are warranted prior to placement.
