The compiled reviews for Elizabeth Adam Crump Health and Rehab present a sharply polarized picture: many reports of high-quality, compassionate care and strong rehabilitation services sit alongside multiple, serious allegations of neglect, unsafe practices, and poor hygiene. Positive comments frequently highlight specific staff members (Admissions staff like “Betty,” certain administrators, and activity staff) and describe excellent PT/OT outcomes, attentive nurses, a warm activities program, and a welcoming, home-like environment. Several reviewers praised long-tenured, knowledgeable employees and recent improvements under new leadership. Amenities such as a gift shop, donated items, and robust activities (bingo, readings, holiday events) were also noted as strengths; some families explicitly recommended the facility and described smooth admissions and private room arrangements.
However, a large number of reviews detail severe and recurrent care-quality problems. Multiple reviewers allege neglectful care including failures in hygiene (residents found with soiled gowns, unwashed drinking cups, dirty hair, poor oral care), and cleanliness issues ranging from urine/feces on floors or clothing to fruit flies and torn pillows. There are specific, alarming medication and safety concerns: reports of pills left in cups, dosing errors, wrong medications being given, and one account describing a patient with oxygen disconnected and found unresponsive (oxygen level reported at 55%). Falls and injuries, inadequate assistance with walking, and residents left unattended for hours are recurring themes. Call-light response times are frequently criticized (30–45 minute waits), and families report residents being left wet or incontinent due to delayed assistance.
Staff behavior and staffing levels are an important source of variability in the reviews. Many accounts praise friendly, caring CNAs and nurses, and note staff who are attentive and good listeners. Contrastingly, numerous reviews describe rude, unprofessional, or indifferent staff, allegations of rough handling, and CNAs distracted by phones or overworked due to understaffing. Several reviewers state that leadership and administration were helpful and hands-on, while others accuse management of poor complaint handling, abrupt communication (e.g., hanging up on callers), and a lack of accountability. Reports suggest high turnover in some positions (for example, social work) and an overall sense by some relatives that the facility has declined over time.
Dining and nutrition also show mixed experiences. Positive comments mention enjoyable activities and social dining opportunities, but many negative reviews report ice-cold food, a monotonous or substandard diet heavy on potatoes, and instances of residents being inadequately fed or eating off each other’s plates. Laundry and clothing management are repeatedly called out: missing garments, residents kept in the same gown, and soiled or urine-soaked clothes are cited as concrete examples of poor daily-care routines.
Facility condition and environment receive conflicting reports. Some visitors and families describe a clean, odor-free building with a neat, orderly appearance and a helpful administrator. Others describe dated facilities, bad smells, filthy shades, pest problems, and a general decline in cleanliness and maintenance. Several reviewers warn about the legitimacy of five-star reviews and suggest checking reviewer histories, implying some concern about suspiciously positive feedback among the posted reviews.
Patterns and notable incidents that merit attention: multiple reviewers describe systemic issues tied to staffing shortages (missed rounds, ignored call bells, delayed bathing), documentable medication and oxygen-related incidents that could be life-threatening, and ongoing sanitation problems. At the same time, repeated praise for the rehab team, specific nurses, and administrators indicates that quality of care may be highly variable depending on shifts, units, or staff members. This inconsistency is a dominant theme: some families feel confident leaving loved ones there, while others strongly advise against it.
Given the breadth and severity of the negative accounts alongside strong positive experiences, readers should interpret the facility’s reputation as mixed but with multiple red flags that warrant investigation. Specific recommended actions for prospective families or regulators based on these reviews: (1) visit in person multiple times and at different times of day/shift to observe staff responsiveness and hygiene; (2) ask for documentation of incident reports, staffing ratios, and recent survey/inspection results; (3) inquire specifically about medication management protocols, fall-prevention measures, infection control, and laundry processes; (4) verify complaints handling procedures and speak directly with administrators praised in positive reviews; and (5) monitor for patterns of delayed call-light responses, missed bathing/laundry care, and any reports of oxygen or medication mishandling.
In summary, Elizabeth Adam Crump Health and Rehab receives both heartfelt praise for specific staff and rehab services and serious, recurring allegations of neglect, poor hygiene, medication and safety lapses, understaffing, and inconsistent management. The mix of glowing and alarming reviews indicates that care quality may vary considerably by unit, shift, or personnel, and several reviews describe potentially dangerous incidents that deserve prompt review by facility leadership and oversight agencies. Prospective residents and families should conduct thorough, time-varied visits, ask pointed questions about the concerns raised here, and consider following up with licensing inspections or complaint records to clarify the facility’s current standing and any corrective actions in place.
