Overall sentiment across the reviews for Moundsville Healthcare Center is mixed and polarized. Several reviewers praise individual caregivers, aides, and certain nurses for being attentive, kind, and knowledgeable about residents’ needs. These positive comments frequently highlight the facility’s ability to involve residents in activities, help them acclimate to the environment, and maintain a generally clean appearance in many areas. Families reported that housekeeping and room cleaning are performed and that the entry system is secure and easy to use. A number of reviews described the facility as conveniently located within walking distance and characterized the care provided as high-quality — even calling it a godsend in at least one account. Therapy services (PT) are present and influential in care and discharge planning, and some families noted positive interactions and family involvement in placement decisions.
However, these positives are tempered by numerous serious concerns that appear repeatedly. Understaffing is a frequent theme, with specific reports of no staff present at the nurses’ station at times and inadequate daily assistance for residents—particularly for those with dementia. Several reviewers reported inconsistent or poor cleanliness in certain areas: dirty or sticky bathrooms, dirty floors, and urine odors in some rooms or halls, even though other reviews said there was no odor and floors were not sticky. Maintenance issues such as moisture on windows and an overall dreary, outdated interior lead some families to state that the facility needs an overhaul. There are also repeated complaints about management instability — frequent administration/name changes and perceived poor leadership — which reviewers connect to staff turnover and declines in overall service quality.
Communication and professionalism are additional recurring problem areas. Multiple reviewers described rude or disrespectful interactions, including a specific complaint naming a nurse (Sandra). Reviews allege unprofessional conduct and even perceived racism. Families expressed frustration with a lack of upfront communication from staff and administration about care plans, policies, and changes. Medication administration and routing problems were noted and in at least one report were linked to perceived health risks. Discharge decisions were another contentious point: some families felt residents were discharged before they were ready, with PT or other staff influencing decisions in ways families disagreed with.
Practical matters and policies also generated dissatisfaction. There are reports of residents’ personal items being lost (for example, hearing aids), unexpected out-of-pocket costs for families, and inconsistent enforcement of room furniture policies — some reviewers described unclear rules and different standards applied to different residents. Dining received explicit criticism in several reviews, with “horrible food” called out directly. Together, these issues contribute to some very low overall ratings (including 1-star votes) and a perception among some families that the facility does not consistently provide safe, respectful, and well-managed care.
In summary, the pattern across these reviews is one of a facility with clear strengths at the caregiver level — caring aides and some compassionate nurses, useful activities, and moments of good cleanliness and secure access — contrasted with systemic weaknesses in staffing levels, management stability, communication, certain aspects of clinical care (medication and discharge practices), maintenance, and food service. Prospective families should weigh the individualized accounts of excellent direct-care staff and positive experiences against repeated reports of understaffing, management turnover, inconsistent cleanliness and policy enforcement, and communication or professionalism problems. If considering this facility, families may want to ask targeted questions about staffing ratios, dementia-care protocols, medication administration procedures, policies on personal belongings, dining menus, and how leadership turnover has been addressed, and to seek recent, on-site observations or references from current residents’ families to determine whether the positive or negative patterns are most reflective of present conditions.
