Overall sentiment across these reviews is largely positive, with a strong and recurring emphasis on the quality of direct care and the compassion of staff. The majority of reviewers praise the nursing and caregiving teams, describing them as attentive, caring, and willing to go above and beyond. Multiple specific staff members and roles (nursing, janitorial, admissions, social work, and activities staff) are singled out for positive mention, and families frequently report feeling reassured and experiencing peace of mind because their loved ones are being well looked after. Rehabilitation and therapy services are highlighted repeatedly as a strength, with reviewers noting good outcomes, regular therapy, and a robust rehabilitation program.
Activities and social engagement are another clear positive theme. Several reviews compliment an active activities program and an engaging activities director who creates meaningful, enjoyable experiences for residents (one described a beach-like event as an example). This, combined with repeated descriptions of a family-like or home-like atmosphere, contributes to a sense that residents receive holistic care that addresses social and emotional needs as well as clinical ones.
Management and administrative communication show mixed but generally favorable patterns. Many reviewers specifically praise the administrator for prioritizing residents and for addressing issues when they arise, and several note helpful, clear admissions meetings and thorough paperwork explanations (including explanations of resident rights and health/dementia education by nursing staff). A number of reviewers singled out particular staff in admissions or social work as helpful and supportive. However, there are isolated but important negative remarks about administration (one review called the admin "lousy"), indicating variability in family experiences with leadership or specific managers.
Notable and recurring concerns center on dining quality, staffing levels, and a few safety or clinical incidents. Food is the most consistently cited negative: while some reviewers simply say the food is "good," others report poor or "horrible" meals. Understaffing is mentioned by multiple reviewers, often in conjunction with hardworking nurses but limited resources — this can contribute to perceptions of occasional lapses in comfort or timeliness of care. A small number of reviews refer to significant clinical problems: one reviewer described a catheter removal followed by an ER visit and pain and explicitly stated a do-not-recommend; another mentioned breathing difficulties for a loved one. These more serious incidents are outliers in the overall positive trend but are important to note as potential risk indicators and areas for quality improvement.
There is some inconsistency in how reviewers describe the facility itself. Several describe it as a small, home-like center with a family atmosphere, while at least one review calls it a large facility — and one reviewer noted that the appearance was nicer than a previous facility. These mixed descriptions suggest that perceptions of size, layout, and atmosphere may vary by unit within the center or by individual expectations.
In summary, Parkersburg Care Center receives strong, repeated commendations for compassionate, attentive staff, effective rehabilitation services, engaging activities, and overall person-centered care that provides families with reassurance. Primary areas for improvement noted across reviews are dining quality, staffing adequacy, and ensuring consistent clinical safety and comfort for all residents. Administrative performance is generally seen as a strength but shows variability in a few reports. Prospective families should weigh the strong testimonials about staff and therapy against the reported issues with meals and occasional clinical lapses; asking specific questions about staffing levels, recent safety incidents, dining menus, and the facility’s quality improvement practices during a tour or admissions conversation would help clarify those concerns.
