Overall sentiment across reviews is mixed, with a substantial split between strongly positive experiences and serious negative complaints. Many reviewers praise the facility, staff, therapy, dining, and social programs; however, several reviews allege significant declines in care quality tied to an ownership change, including neglect, sanitation problems, and financial/account access issues. The contrast is stark: numerous families report top‑notch, attentive care and a clean, modern environment, while others report unsafe or disrespectful conditions that directly affected residents’ health.
Positive themes: Multiple reviews describe the facility as clean, modern, and recently updated, with comfortable surroundings. Physical therapy is repeatedly highlighted as excellent, and many reviewers say nursing staff, caregivers, and administrative personnel are kind, attentive, and informative. Dining receives high marks in many accounts — reviewers mention excellent food, private dining options, and staff-supported celebrations like birthday events. Several families explicitly recommend the facility, report satisfaction with long‑term placements, and note that social workers have recommended it. Some reviews emphasize comprehensive medical, social, and nutritional care, and describe the facility as pleasant and professional.
Negative themes: A number of reviews report severe problems that raise quality‑of‑care concerns. Several reviewers link a change in ownership to declining conditions: complaints include disgusting food, weight loss in residents, lack of updates and communication with families, and a need for families to bring or deliver food. Hygiene and personal care neglect are repeatedly mentioned — specific reports include untrimmed nails, food residue on residents’ faces and hairlines, dirty feet, and residents left in urine or stool without timely bathroom assistance. One review notes a stage 2 bedsore and another describes the death of a resident’s mother in the context of these concerns. Environmental sanitation issues are also reported, including dirty bathrooms, overflowing trash, and pest problems (bed bugs and roaches). Administrative/financial problems are raised as well, including difficulty accessing resident funds and reports that the facility blocks or does not accept Medicaid patients, which reviewers say creates placement barriers and delays. The facility’s private‑pay cost (approximately $400/day) is noted alongside these Medicaid access concerns.
Patterns and variability: The reviews indicate meaningful variability in experiences. Some reviewers describe an outstanding, well‑run facility with consistently high standards; others describe serious lapses in basic care and sanitation. This suggests either changes over time (for example, complaints tied to an ownership transition) or uneven performance across units or staffing shifts. Positive comments about a "new facility" and modern features coexist with reports of recent deterioration, reinforcing the possibility of temporal or unit‑level differences in quality.
Implications for prospective families: The mixed picture warrants careful, proactive evaluation. Positive reports indicate the facility can deliver excellent therapy, social programming, and attentive staff; however, the negative reports describe issues that directly affect resident safety and dignity (feeding/hydration neglect, hygiene failures, bed sore, pests, and poor communication). Important questions to verify in person or with management include current ownership and staffing changes, recent inspection and citation history, pest control and cleaning protocols, procedures for bathing/toileting and wound care, how food quality and weight changes are monitored, communication protocols with families, policies on resident funds access, and current Medicaid acceptance/placement procedures. A thorough, unannounced walk‑through and conversations with multiple families and staff members (and the facility’s quality/inspection records) will help clarify which pattern of care is more representative today.
Summary judgment: There are many strongly positive testimonials about care quality, therapy, and staff warmth, but the serious negative allegations reported by multiple reviewers — especially those tied to ownership change, neglect, sanitation, pests, and financial/Medicaid issues — cannot be ignored. Prospective residents and family members should treat the facility as potentially high‑quality but also potentially inconsistent; perform in‑person checks, ask pointed questions about the specific concerns noted above, and confirm recent regulatory reports before deciding.
