Overall sentiment in the reviews is highly mixed, with clear and repeated praise for the facility’s rehabilitation and therapy services contrasted by serious, recurring operational and safety concerns. Multiple reviewers emphasize that the PT and OT teams deliver outstanding, often life-changing therapy; several individuals singled out therapists by name (Kevin, AVA, Tamara) and described therapy staff as expert, kind, and instrumental in recovery. Positive accounts also highlight a welcoming physical environment—beautiful buildings, outdoor areas and a hair salon—and numerous community events that create a family-like atmosphere for residents. In these favorable reports, staff across departments coordinate well, social workers smooth the discharge process, and families feel supported and reassured.
However, a significant cluster of negative themes appears repeatedly and is severe enough to outweigh the positives for many reviewers. The most frequent complaint is chronic understaffing: descriptions such as "one nurse per floor," frequent use of agency staff, and long call-button response times recur across summaries. Understaffing is linked to delayed medication administration (or missed meds), medication being found unsecured (meds in cabinets, pills under beds), and long gaps in monitoring that create real safety and dignity concerns (residents left in soiled clothing or waste). These are not isolated gripes but consistent patterns that reviewers say required family members to advocate actively for their loved ones.
Cleanliness and infection-control issues are another prominent negative pattern. Reviews mention unclean rooms and carpets, ice coolers left in hallways (a germ concern), and most alarmingly, at least one report of bed bug infestation and bite risk—an acute safety and sanitation problem. Coupled with reports of a COVID-related incident and staff not taking responsibility, these concerns raise questions about the facility’s environmental maintenance and infection prevention practices.
Communication and management problems amplify these operational failings. Several reviewers say the phone system is unreliable and staff are difficult to reach, forcing families to visit in person to check on residents. There are accounts of unhelpful or rude nursing staff, allegations of CNA misconduct (eating from residents’ trays), and contradictory descriptions of administration—from reports of an "abusive administrator" and management unresponsiveness to other reviewers saying administration "goes above and beyond." This inconsistency suggests variability in leadership performance or uneven enforcement of standards across units or shifts. One reviewer also reported a hiring/HR concern—no callback after an interview and potential age discrimination—indicating possible internal culture problems beyond resident care.
Dining and daily living supports attract mixed comments as well. Positive reviews mention delicious food and enjoyable events, while negative reviews cite cold meals, skipped or minimal meals, and persistent complaints about food quality. The net impression is that dining experiences vary significantly depending on staffing, shift, or individual unit. Similarly, while some residents report private rooms and comfortable accommodations, others describe depressing rooms, lack of basic room necessities, and inadequate cleaning.
Taken together, the reviews suggest that Star City Rehab and Nursing can provide exceptionally good rehabilitation and, at times, compassionate and coordinated care—particularly from therapy teams—yet suffers from systemic operational shortcomings that create safety, hygiene, and reliability risks. Key areas needing urgent attention are staffing levels and retention (to reduce reliance on agency staff), medication administration and secure storage procedures, infection control and housekeeping (including addressing the bed bug report), and communication systems (phone access and staff responsiveness). Management consistency and accountability also need strengthening to resolve alleged misconduct and to ensure families feel listened to rather than having to become full-time advocates.
For prospective residents and families, the decision will depend largely on priorities and tolerance for risk. Those seeking strong, short-term rehab outcomes who can closely monitor care and advocate may have very positive experiences, while families looking for consistently reliable 24/7 custodial and medical care should be cautious. Multiple reviewers explicitly recommend waiting for improvements to staffing, communication systems, and cleanliness before trusting the facility with vulnerable residents. If leadership addresses these operational failures while maintaining the strong therapy and compassionate staff noted by many, the facility’s overall quality could become more consistently positive.
