Overall sentiment across the reviews for Ciel of Issaquah is highly mixed, with a large number of glowing, detailed testimonials praising individual caregivers, activities, dining, and the physical campus, but also a substantial set of severe, specific complaints describing safety and neglect issues, management failings, and damaging operational changes after ownership transitions. Many families report excellent, compassionate care that improved residents' quality of life—clean, attractive facilities, robust activities, and staff who went above and beyond. Conversely, several reviews recount alarming incidents (dehydration, residents found in bed unattended and naked, dried feces cleaned off residents) and systemic failures (medications withheld, eviction notices issued), creating a deep split in reviewer experience. The overall pattern suggests pockets of excellent, resident-centered care coexisting with serious lapses in clinical oversight and management accountability observed by multiple reviewers.
Care quality and resident safety are the most prominent and polarizing themes. Positive reviews emphasize individualized attention, affectionate and patient caregivers, effective memory-care programming, strong end-of-life support, and reliable daily care for many residents. Activities and therapies (movie theater, outings, Beach Ball Therapy, PT, dexterity exercises, scenic tours and weekly restaurant/ice cream outings) are frequently praised as engaging and comprehensive. Meals are commonly described as tasty and nutritious, with portions and snacks that residents enjoy. However, other reviews report major clinical and safety lapses: dehydration linked to blocked saliva glands, withholding of medications (including sleep meds and mood stabilizers), failure to monitor walking or properly use wheelchairs, and diabetes- and edema-related risks. Several families describe unacceptable toileting and bathing neglect (body odor, not bathed, dried feces), and at least one account reports a resident found unattended and exposed. These are not isolated, minor service complaints but serious allegations that reviewers say were reported to the state.
Staff behavior and culture show wide variability. Many reviewers single out caregivers, nurses, activities staff, and administrators for praise—calling them "angels," "family-like," and naming specific staff and directors who were attentive, communicative, and compassionate. Those positive testimonials often highlight continuity of care, individualized plans, and staff who take time for residents. At the same time, a recurring negative motif is staff distracted by phones, appearing annoyed when approached, or being unresponsive to call buttons. Several reviews say staff communication is poor during shift changes, with care plans and important patient details not passed between caregivers. High turnover, reliance on temporary workers, and inconsistent training are implicated in the reports of care decline and miscommunication.
Management, ownership changes, and organizational transparency are central to the divergent experiences. A number of reviewers explicitly tie a deterioration in care to a change in ownership or management, saying the facility was "previously terrific under old management" but declined after a takeover. Complaints include loss of experienced staff, a drop in caregiver-to-resident ratios, leadership that is described as overbearing or heartless, and instances of eviction or termination notices (one reviewer mentions a 30-day termination and a confrontational eviction interaction attributed to a named administrator). Conversely, other reviewers note positive leadership and a recent turnaround under a new or different executive team—naming an Executive Director Jordan, and praising a renewed sense of direction and improvements in memory-care space and overall culture. This suggests that leadership changes have materially impacted resident experience both negatively and positively depending on timing and which team was in place.
Facilities, amenities, and activities generally receive strong praise for design and upkeep in many reviews: bright, hotel-like common areas, well-kept gardens, a single-floor memory-care layout, companion suites, and pet-friendly policies. Several reviewers report that amenities—movie theater, main street/activity areas—are well-run and meaningful. However, other reviews say the building looks good but that amenities are locked or rarely made available to residents, implying a discrepancy between appearance and daily practice. Dining is generally a strength, with frequent mentions of enjoyable meals, good food variety, and staff accommodating picky eaters, though a few reviews note the desire for improvements like an executive chef and more consistent housekeeping.
Medical oversight and staffing patterns are recurring operational concerns. Multiple reviews allege no RN coverage at night and on weekends, leading families to worry about clinical decision-making and medication management during those times. Complaints about medication errors, withheld meds causing pain and behavioral changes, and poor coordination with doctors are serious red flags reported by several families who then moved residents to other facilities with better medical coordination. Understaffing—especially nights and weekends—and inconsistent passing of care information between shifts were repeatedly mentioned as contributing factors to falls, missed care, and worsening conditions.
Communication with families is another area of split impressions. Many reviewers laud staff and administration for being responsive, listening to concerns, and acting quickly—reporting an experience of partnership and transparent updates. Yet an equally vocal set of reviews describes intimidation, rude responses, and reluctance from staff/leadership to accept questions or complaints, with some families feeling stonewalled and forced to escalate to state authorities. Reports of theft, missing clothing, laundry mismanagement, and unexplained resident movements increased distrust among families in those accounts.
In summary, the reviews portray Ciel of Issaquah as a facility capable of providing outstanding, compassionate memory and assisted living care—when stable leadership, adequate staffing, and consistent clinical oversight are in place. However, multiple reviewers report severe safety and quality failures tied to management transitions, understaffing, lack of RN coverage, medication mishandling, and poor hygiene care. If considering Ciel of Issaquah, prospective families should weigh the frequent praise for staff, activities, facilities, and dining against the serious allegations of neglect and operational instability in some accounts. Key practical steps implied by the review patterns: verify current leadership stability and staffing ratios (especially RN coverage at night/weekends), ask about medication management and incident reporting practices, tour the facility multiple times/dayparts to observe staff responsiveness and amenity access, and request references from recent families. The mixed but strong extremes in these reviews indicate that resident experience here can vary dramatically depending on management, staffing, and which unit or shift is providing care.
