The reviews for Franklin Hills Health & Rehab are highly polarized and contain recurring, specific themes. A consistent positive thread is that many frontline caregivers — especially CNAs — are described as compassionate, hardworking, and dedicated. Multiple reviewers single out physical and occupational therapy (PT/OT) as a strong point and praise rehab services. Several families report a home-like, family atmosphere created by attentive staff, and some reviewers describe the facility as clean, well maintained, and professionally run. COVID-19 precautions such as mask usage and sanitizer availability were noted positively. These favorable accounts tend to emphasize individual staff members or teams who go above and beyond, successful admissions experiences, and instances of responsive maintenance and housekeeping.
Counterbalancing those positives are numerous, serious negative reports that raise safety and quality-of-care concerns. The most alarming themes are allegations of neglect and inadequate medical care: reviewers cite multiple urinary tract infections progressing to sepsis, malnutrition, skin breakdown, long periods of being left unattended (one report of over five hours), and allegations of residents not being fed for days. There are also claims that feeding tubes, IVs, or timely wound care were delayed or not provided. Medication management problems appear frequently — delayed or withheld medications, poor pain control, and general unreliability of medication administration. These reports describe visible declines in some residents' health tied to lapses in clinical care.
Staffing and management are central contributors to the negative sentiment. Many reviewers characterize the facility as understaffed and say remaining staff are overworked and undervalued, which reviewers link to inattentive care and long response times to call bells. Frequent administrator turnover and reports of disorganized, comical-to-pathetic administration recur, along with specific accusations of poor customer service, rude interactions, long phone hold times, scheduling problems, and paperwork or discharge-day mix-ups. There are even reports alleging HIPAA violations and insurance-driven restrictions that limit care. Several reviewers specifically state that weekends are particularly problematic — limited services, no coffee/hot water, and minimal staffing — further amplifying safety and comfort issues during those periods.
Dining, hygiene, and the physical environment receive mixed but concerning reviews. Many reviewers describe food as disgusting, locked microwaves without substitutes, outdated or rotted items, and failure to follow dietary instructions. Others state the food improved at times or was home-style and pleasant when different staff were in charge. Similarly, facility cleanliness and smell are reported both ways: some visitors describe the facility as clean, well-kept, and pleasantly decorated (including holiday decorations), while others report foul stenches, apparent rodent evidence, dirty common areas, and unkempt residents. This pattern of contradictory accounts suggests wide variability in day-to-day operations or rapid changes in quality depending on staffing and management.
Social engagement and programming are additional weak points in multiple reviews. Several family members say there are few activities beyond physical therapy, a lack of enrichment or welcome programming, and that residents feel lonely or “stinky” rather than engaged or lively. Positive reports about a pleasant community room and residents dining with guests show that when staffing and leadership support activities, the environment can be pleasant, but many reviews note limited recreational offerings and social isolation for residents.
There are multiple extreme negative claims (e.g., allegations of death related to neglect, severe unsanitary conditions, and repeated calls to avoid the facility), and a number of one-star or zero-star sentiments. At the same time, other reviews offer glowing endorsements, saying the facility has experienced a substantial turnaround and praising specific staff and therapy services. Taken together, the reviews suggest highly inconsistent performance over time and across shifts: strong, compassionate frontline care in some instances, countered by management instability, understaffing, and clinical lapses in others.
In summary, the review corpus indicates that Franklin Hills Health & Rehab has notable strengths — particularly in hands-on caregiving by CNAs and in rehabilitation services — but also substantial and recurrent weaknesses in management, staffing levels, clinical care reliability, medication administration, dining, and hygiene. The facility appears to experience wide variability in quality, likely tied to administration turnover and staffing shortages. For prospective residents or family members, these patterns warrant close, specific inquiry: ask about current staffing ratios, medication administration procedures, recent inspection reports, infection control and nutrition practices, weekend staffing, and turnover among leadership. If possible, perform multiple visits at different times/days, speak directly with therapy staff and several frontline caregivers, and request written policies on medication timing, dietary accommodation, and incident reporting to assess whether the positive aspects reported by some reviewers are consistently delivered and whether the serious safety concerns reported by others have been addressed.
