The reviews for Elkins Rehabilitation & Care Center present a sharply mixed picture with both strongly positive and strongly negative accounts. On the positive side, several reviewers praised the nursing staff as responsive, caring, and very nice; one reviewer explicitly said their mother liked the facility and received good treatment. Multiple comments highlight good meals and a very clean environment. These positive remarks indicate that, for some residents and families, the facility provides compassionate care, acceptable dining, and adequate cleanliness and daily living supports.
On the negative side, there are extremely serious and specific allegations that point to potential abuse and neglect. Reported problems include physical abuse by staff, an account describing a nurse slamming a resident into a wall, documented injuries such as a fractured foot and bruises, and development of bed sores. Reviewers also cited neglectful care, delayed medical attention, lack of privacy, and an overall sense of fear and distress among residents. Several reviewers explicitly stated they would not recommend the facility. These complaints, particularly the reports of physical harm and untreated wounds (bed sores), are red flags for both resident safety and quality of medical oversight.
Taken together, the reviews suggest significant inconsistency in the quality of care at Elkins Rehabilitation & Care Center. The coexistence of strong praise for nurses and cleanliness alongside allegations of abuse and neglect indicates that experiences may vary substantially by unit, shift, or individual staff members. Positive comments about responsiveness and kindness from some nurses show that competent, compassionate care does occur; however, the severity of the negative reports means that such positive experiences are not universal and may not be reliably reproducible for every resident.
Facilities and dining receive more uniformly positive notes — cleanliness and meals were specifically mentioned as positives — which suggests that the physical environment and food service may be adequate or better. However, the reports do not provide much information about activities, programming, or administrative responsiveness beyond frontline staff behavior. Management is not directly mentioned in the summaries provided, but the nature and severity of the negative incidents imply potential lapses in supervision, staff training, incident reporting, or internal investigation procedures.
Overall sentiment is polarized: some family members feel well served and comfortable recommending the facility, while others report traumatic experiences and serious safety issues. The most significant themes to emerge are (1) reports of abusive behavior and resident injuries, (2) neglect manifested as delayed medical attention and bed sores, and (3) positive staff interactions and a clean, well-run physical environment for other residents. Given the gravity of the negative allegations, these reviews warrant careful follow-up — for example, asking facility management for incident records, staffing and training policies, and documentation of corrective actions — before drawing firm conclusions or making placement decisions.
