Overall sentiment: Reviews for Heartwood Extended Health Care are highly polarized, but the aggregate signal is one of caution. A substantial number of reviews describe serious clinical and safety lapses — neglect, hygiene problems, medication and wound-care errors, and systemic understaffing — alongside a substantial minority of positive accounts praising skilled rehabilitation teams, compassionate caregivers, and recent administrative improvements. The pattern is inconsistent: some families report excellent rehab outcomes and attentive staff, while others describe life‑threatening neglect, infections, and poor responsiveness.
Care quality and clinical safety: A dominant theme in the negative reviews is clinical risk and neglect. Multiple reviewers report medication errors and delays (including slow PRN pain medication), missed medication administration, pills left on tables, and prescription/faxing problems. There are repeated reports of inadequate wound care, bedsores, catheter mishandling, UTIs and sepsis that reportedly led to hospital transfers. Several accounts describe residents left in bowel movements or urine for extended periods, sheets not changed, bathing and hygiene neglected, and staff sleeping on duty. At the extreme, reviewers allege deaths, disease progression, or serious harm while under the facility’s care. Conversely, other reviewers state the rehabilitation services (PT/OT) were effective and helped residents regain strength, and some families say their loved ones were discharged in better health.
Staffing, staff behavior and culture: Staffing shortages and burnout are recurring complaints. Reviewers commonly note long call-light waits, overworked CNAs and nurses, inadequate 24-hour aid coverage, and high staff turnover. Several reviews claim unprofessional or rude behavior from specific staff (including a named head nurse), language discrimination, and a workplace culture described by some as “cutthroat” or demoralized. However, many reviews also call out individual staff and teams as compassionate, caring and going above and beyond — naming standout admissions coordinators and nurses — and multiple posts credit a new or hands-on administrator with improved engagement and accountability.
Facility condition, cleanliness and safety concerns: Numerous reviews describe maintenance and environmental problems: persistent urine/feces odors near rooms and shower areas, clogged or leaking shower heads, lukewarm or pink‑tinged sink water with odor, mold, toilets not sealed (sewage smell), dilapidated lighting, a deteriorating front entrance canopy, and fire alarm outages. Several reviewers noted no air conditioning, reliance on swamp coolers, and a generally hot, uncomfortable building. There are reports of unsafe conditions such as unsecured windows, dementia patients nearly eloping, and falls with slow response times. Simultaneously, some reviewers describe clean rooms and well-kept spaces, demonstrating inconsistent standards across time or units.
Dining and amenities: Opinions on food are mixed: some families praise the meals, multiple entree choices and improved menus under new management; others report poor or cold meals, diabetic meals that are inappropriate (high carb), and cheap bulk soaps. A practical concern raised repeatedly is that in-room phones and TVs are not standard; reviewers say residents must bring their own or pay monthly fees (e.g., $20/month for TV or landline), and pricing information is reportedly not clear on the website.
Administration, communication and accountability: Communication and transparency emerge as major pain points. Reported problems include missing paperwork, no logs, runarounds when seeking information, poor or delayed updates to families, and late or canceled care conferences. Some reviews recount alarming administrative events (eviction notices, transfer refusals, police or fire department involvement). On the other hand, multiple recent reviews praise a change in administration, noting improved food, more engaged staff, quicker responses to concerns, and a more patient‑centered approach. This suggests there may have been leadership changes that produced measurable improvements for some residents — though not all reviewers acknowledge those changes.
Therapy, activities and social services: Many reviewers highlight strong therapy programs and active social services. Positive mentions include effective PT/OT, a solid memory program, scheduled activities, an excellent social worker, and staff who help residents find housing or post‑discharge resources. These services are often cited as reasons reviewers would recommend the facility for short‑term skilled rehab.
Notable patterns and red flags: The reviews show a bifurcated pattern: clusters of praise centered on rehabilitation outcomes, particular staff members, and newer administrative responsiveness; and clusters of serious concern involving hygiene, safety, medication and documentation failures. Repeated, specific allegations (bedsores, soiled beds, infection, catheter mishaps, smells of feces/urine, paperwork gaps, and reports of staff sleeping on shift) should be treated as significant red flags. Multiple reviewers also report financial or administrative surprises (extra fees, unclear pricing, and insurance or eviction disputes), which increase the need for prospective families to verify billing and policies in writing.
Bottom line: Heartwood Extended Health Care appears to deliver excellent skilled rehabilitation and compassionate care in many individual cases, especially where motivated staff and engaged administrators are present. However, the facility also has numerous reviews alleging serious lapses in basic nursing care, cleanliness, safety and communication. The most reliable account from these reviews is that experiences vary widely by unit, staff on shift, and possibly by time (with some reviewers noting improvements after administrative changes). Prospective residents and families should carefully verify current staffing levels, infection-control and wound-care practices, incident logs, recent inspection reports, billing policies, and who will be the direct care team. In-person visits during different shifts, direct conversations with therapy and nursing leadership, and checking state inspection and complaint records are prudent steps before placement given the depth and severity of complaints reported alongside the positive rehabilitation experiences.
