Overall sentiment across reviews for Tacoma Nursing & Rehabilitation Center is highly polarized: a substantial number of reviewers report excellent, compassionate care — especially from CNAs, nurses, therapists, and social services staff — while a significant portion describe serious quality, safety, and management problems. Positive reviews repeatedly highlight individualized attention, effective rehabilitation, strong discharge planning, and named staff members who provided exceptional care and compassion. Negative reviews point to recurring operational and safety issues, including medication errors, slow or ignored call lights, hygiene problems, and administrative defensiveness. This split suggests major variability in resident experience that often depends on specific staff members, shifts, or recent management changes.
Care quality and staffing patterns show the clearest contrast. Many families and residents praise CNAs and nurses for being professional, attentive, and going "above and beyond," and several nurses, CNAs, therapists, and social workers receive repeated personal recognition. Rehabilitation services and therapists are frequently called out as a strength; many reviewers credit the therapy team with meaningful progress, and the facility is considered a solid option for short-term rehab or post-hospital recovery. At the same time, there are persistent reports of medication administration mistakes, missed assessments after falls, and at least one account of bedsores and extended immobility. Staffing inconsistency is a recurring theme: reviewers note that care quality fluctuates by shift, with evenings and back-of-house staff sometimes described as slower or less engaged. Multiple comments call for better in-service training and more consistent adherence to care protocols.
Nursing, privacy, and safety concerns are prominent in negative reviews. Call-button response times of up to 45 minutes — and in some reports, hours — are reported repeatedly, with consequences including residents left wet, dirty, or unattended. Several reviewers described staff entering rooms without knocking and other privacy breaches. There are allegations of neglect ranging from missed checks to poor bathing/showering practices (sponge baths in lieu of full showers), a failed fire inspection for slow response, and reports of falls without timely family notification or concussion assessment. These are serious safety echoes and, combined with medication errors and reports of unprofessional or defensive staff behavior, form a substantial area of concern for long-term placement decisions.
Facility, cleanliness, and amenities are described inconsistently. Many reviewers praise the building as clean and well-maintained, with good housekeeping, trimmed nails, and tidy rooms for many residents. Conversely, other reviewers report bad smells, rooms that were not cleaned regularly, broken equipment (frequently broken ice machine), missing in-room phones, and spotty internet/phone mainline response. The physical plant is described as older by some but secure and spacious; recent comments suggest some upgrades and visible improvement under new administration. These mixed observations point to variability in maintenance and day-to-day facility performance.
Dining, activities, and communications show mixed but notable problems. Several families lamented the food — citing cold meals, low protein and fiber, high-carb menus, little variety, and failure to provide meal replacements when residents missed trays — while other reviewers described food as "ok" or "impressive." Activity programming and communication about activities were criticized by some (little to no activity communication or participation), while others said there were many activities and an engaging atmosphere. Communication with families is another divided area: many reviewers praise social services and front-office staff for proactive discharge planning, Medicaid assistance, and regular updates; others report poor communication, unreturned phone calls, inaccurate or misleading information from higher-ups, and aggressive or dismissive interactions from certain administrators or staff.
Management, culture, and recent changes are important context. Multiple reviewers singled out management problems — such as defensive responses to complaints, alleged financial prioritization, rude or unprofessional administration, and inconsistent leadership — while a number of comments mention a new administrator and head nurse and describe noticeable improvements since those changes. Several reviewers urge that the facility has "growing pains" and pandemic-related impacts; others say a culture shift is underway under new leadership. The frequent naming of individuals who are praised and the reports of staff who are described as exemplary indicate that staff culture can be a major determinant of experience. However, reports of bullying, malicious neglect, and threats of legal action indicate serious cultural and safety failures in some cases.
Patterns and recommendations for prospective families: reviews suggest two important conclusions. First, Tacoma Nursing & Rehabilitation Center can provide excellent short-term rehab and very compassionate hands-on care from particular nurses, CNAs, therapists, and social workers; it is frequently recommended for rehab stays and appreciated for discharge support. Second, for longer-term placement or for residents requiring high levels of vigilance (complex medication regimens, high fall risk, incontinence care), there are repeated red flags — call-light responsiveness, medication safety, bathing and hygiene, privacy, and administrative responsiveness — that warrant careful inquiry. Prospective families should tour the facility, ask about recent safety records (falls, medication errors, fire inspection results), inquire specifically about call-light response times and staffing on evenings/weekends, confirm meal options and substitution policies, ask about protocols for missing personal items, and seek references for specific nurses or CNAs if continuity is important. Also ask about recent management changes and documented improvements.
In summary, the reviews paint a facility with notable strengths — particularly in rehabilitation, social services, and many individual caregivers who are highly dedicated — but also with significant, recurring operational and safety concerns that create a polarized reputation. Outcomes and experiences appear to depend heavily on which staff members and shifts a resident encounters and on evolving leadership. The facility may be a good choice for some short-term rehab cases and families who can identify and work with praised staff members; however, concerns around medication safety, call-light responsiveness, bathing and hygiene, and management transparency make caution appropriate for longer-term placement unless specific assurances and recent improvements can be verified.
