The reviews for Holladay Healthcare Center are strongly polarized, with a large number of accounts describing outstanding, hands-on rehabilitation and compassionate care, and a roughly equal number reporting serious neglect, safety, and management problems. Many families and residents describe therapists, nurses, and CNAs as dedicated, skilled, and supportive, producing excellent rehab outcomes and timely recovery. Conversely, other reviewers recount delayed responses to call lights, inadequate hygiene and wound care, missing personal effects, and administrative unresponsiveness. This split creates an overall impression of a facility capable of excellent care in some circumstances but also prone to lapses that can lead to harm or distress.
Care quality and staffing emerge as the dominant themes. Positive reports highlight phenomenal CNAs and a skilled therapy staff who deliver effective physical and occupational therapy, sometimes twice daily, and who help residents recover and return home. Several reviewers specifically credit the clinical and therapy teams with exceeding expectations. At the same time, numerous reviews recount understaffing, long shifts, inattentive aides (often described as distracted or on phones), and slow or ignored call-button responses. These staffing issues are frequently linked to serious clinical outcomes in negative reviews — missed turns leading to bedsores, untreated UTIs or dehydration, medication delays and withdrawal, and inadequate wound care. Multiple reviewers also say that night and evening shifts are noticeably worse than day shifts, creating uneven continuity of care.
Therapy and rehabilitation are areas of particular contrast. Many families praise the therapy department as exceptional, calling out individualized plans, professional therapists, and measurable rehab success. These positive therapy experiences drive many of the strongest recommendations of the facility. In contrast, other reviewers describe a run-down rehab gym, broken equipment, or insufficient therapy staffing that limited or harmed recovery — in at least one case an injury during therapy was reported. The message from the reviews is that therapy can be a strong point, but quality appears dependent on staff availability, timing, and unit-specific resources.
Facility condition and cleanliness are similarly mixed. A number of reviewers describe newly remodeled, clean, bright wings with good natural light and pleasant common areas, while others report an old, poorly maintained building with broken toilets, dark long-term rooms, and housekeeping lapses such as dirty sheets or spills left uncleaned for days. Sanitary concerns are serious in some accounts, including reports of mucus or unsanitary conditions in dining areas and failures in hand hygiene and bedside water access. These contrasting descriptions suggest variability between different halls, shifts, or time periods rather than a single consistent state of upkeep.
Dining and dietary management receive frequent mention but with conflicting experiences. Several families praise restaurant-style dining, timely admissions to the dining room, and pleasant meals. However, negative reviews commonly criticize food quality as unappetizing or inadequate, including cold or poor-texture entrees, and explicit failures to honor dietary restrictions for residents with diabetes or liquid diets. There are also accounts of dietary items being denied (broth or other requested items) and inconsistent meal management that can have clinical consequences for medically vulnerable residents.
Personal belongings, laundry, and privacy are recurrent problem areas in the negative reports. Missing items — glasses, dentures, hearing aids, and clothing — are a persistent complaint, along with laundry mistakes that left residents wearing others’ clothes or receiving commingled garments. Several reviewers alleged staff theft or reported no satisfactory response when items disappeared. Privacy concerns extend to reports of nonclinical staff rummaging through personal effects. These issues, coupled with sporadic poor communication and unresponsiveness from administrators or admissions staff, heighten family anxiety and reduce trust.
Management and communication are described in both positive and negative terms. Some reviewers commend hands-on administrators and timely involvement from managers who resolved admission or room placement issues. Other accounts describe unanswered phones, missed updates, canceled or mishandled transportation/doctor appointments, and admission mix-ups. A handful of reviewers say they planned to report the facility to accrediting bodies due to perceived quality-of-care violations. This makes leadership responsiveness — or lack thereof — a critical differentiator in families’ experiences.
Amenities and activities are generally a plus when available: on-site salon and barber services, outings and excursions, pet-friendliness, and a variety of activities receive favorable comments. Yet reviewers also reported service interruptions such as the salon being closed for over a month, and limited access to showers in some wings. These inconsistencies further underscore the variable resident experience.
In summary, Holladay Healthcare Center appears to be a facility with the capacity to deliver excellent, attentive clinical and therapy care in many cases, supported by compassionate staff, effective therapists, and pleasant amenities in parts of the building. At the same time, there is a substantial and recurring set of complaints indicating inconsistent staffing levels, communication failures, lapses in basic hygiene and safety, missing personal items, and administrative unresponsiveness. Prospective residents and families should be aware of the variability across shifts and units: a strong daytime therapy and nursing team may coexist with weaker evening or long-term care coverage. Recommendations based on the reviews would be to tour during multiple shifts, ask directly about staffing ratios, laundry and personal-effects protocols, wound care and infection-control practices, dietary accommodations, and mechanisms for escalation and complaint resolution before placement. If serious neglect or clinical deterioration is observed, families in the reviews encouraged immediate escalation to supervisors, use of case managers, contacting hospice if appropriate, and reporting to regulators when warranted.
