Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed, with a clear split between strong praise for the facility’s environment, social life, and many staff members, and serious concerns about communication, assessment/admissions practices, staffing levels, and specific care incidents. Several reviewers emphasize that Kensington Gardens Resort Living presents very well—its grounds and building are described as visually appealing and well-manicured—and that many staff are warm, professional, and attentive. Positive accounts highlight dependable day-to-day care, active coordination of medical appointments, planned outings, musical entertainment, and a welcoming ethos that makes residents feel loved, safe, and socially engaged. For some families, these strengths translate into real peace of mind and noticeable improvement in a loved one’s mood and social life.
However, those positive impressions are counterbalanced by significant and recurring negative themes. Multiple reviewers raise questions about cost and value, calling the community expensive and saying it did not meet expectations for that price. There is also confusion or dissatisfaction about whether the community offers assisted living services as expected; at least one reviewer explicitly states “not assisted living,” indicating a potential mismatch between marketing or assumptions and the services provided. Communication breakdowns are another frequent complaint: reviewers reported no follow-up phone calls, a lack of questions or clarity during the initial assessment, and generally poor communication from management or admissions staff.
Care-quality and safety concerns appear in several reviews and are among the most serious patterns. Some reviewers described understaffing that resulted in basic needs being missed—examples include residents being hungry or thirsty and an “empty bag of chocolates” cited as a sign of neglect. One review reports an extreme care issue involving hospice medication: opioids allegedly given against the patient’s wishes, followed by a death. Another reviewer described a situation in which a move-in was refused after two days because of behavioral issues when a resident was not on their medication. These accounts suggest potential inconsistencies in medication management, hospice coordination, staff training, and admission decision-making.
Mixed impressions also extend to the admissions and evaluation process itself. Several reviewers described the assessment as confusing or cursory; one said the assessment “went fine” but also noted no questions were asked and there was no phone call. Another reviewer said they were “bit confused during assessment.” There is a concern that initial evaluations may not fully capture a resident’s needs or that communication about those needs is incomplete, which could lead to inappropriate placements or unmet needs after move-in.
On the positive side, when staffing and care align, reviewers describe a highly supportive daily experience: staff who coordinate appointments, welcome friends for lunch, plan outings, and create opportunities for socialization and new friendships. Multiple comments describe a resident who “thrived,” enjoying entertainers and companionship, and families who felt reassured by the attention and warmth their relatives received. The contrast between the very good hands-on care some families witnessed and the troubling reports from others suggests variability in experience that may depend on specific units, shifts, or staff on duty.
Taken together, the reviews point to a community with strong aesthetic appeal, a capacity for excellent social programming and personalized care, but with notable weaknesses in communication, consistency of clinical care and staffing, and transparency about services and costs. Prospective residents and families should therefore prioritize an in-person visit and a focused conversation about staffing ratios, medication management and hospice policies, the admissions/assessment process, what services are included in fees, and examples of how the community handles emergencies or declines in health. Asking for recent references from current residents’ families and observing multiple meal times and activity periods can help confirm whether the positive aspects noted in many reviews are consistent and whether the concerning patterns are being addressed.
