Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed: many reviewers praise the campus, staff, and therapy outcomes, while a substantial number report inconsistent care, management problems, and maintenance or safety concerns. Positive reports emphasize attentive, caring, and well-educated staff members, strong physical therapy services, successful rehabilitation outcomes, and an active program of activities. The property itself receives frequent compliments for its attractive campus, courtyard with benches, natural light, birdfeeders, pleasant views, ample parking, and updated interior rooms and common areas. Several reviewers specifically mention clean, home-like apartments and well-appointed bathrooms, a full beauty salon, and accommodating meal service including carryout options. For some families, the facility provided peace of mind and a well-run experience with collaborative care planning and productive weekly care meetings.
Care and clinical services are described inconsistently across reviews. Physical therapy is repeatedly called excellent and credited for successful rehab stays; occupational therapy and nursing receive more mixed assessments—some reviewers report excellent, experienced therapists and attentive nursing, while others report that OT “did not listen,” that they never met a nurse, or that medication was lost. Multiple reviews call out long waits for assistance and uneven staff responsiveness. Several accounts describe collaborative care and strong communication (regular care meetings and clear staff interactions), but these positive reports sit alongside critiques of staff turnover and inconsistent performance, suggesting variation in experience by unit, shift, or time period.
Facility and campus comments are largely favorable but not unanimous. Many reviewers praise the attractive exterior, courtyard, and some newly remodeled interiors; others note the building shows its age in places, that remodeling is ongoing, or that rooms can be transitioning (single to double). There are recurring complaints about maintenance and cleanliness of outdoor areas—trash and litter on the property and insufficient garbage cans—plus a few reviews alleging employees were observed throwing wrappers on the ground. A notable operational safety complaint describes an unreachable light or emergency cord in a room, and other safety-related concerns arise indirectly through lost medication and long response times.
Dining and activities are strengths for many residents but not for all. Several reviewers call the food excellent and praise accommodating meal service, while others describe the food as bland or boring and express dissatisfaction with nutrition. Activities programming is widely praised: daily programs, indoor gaming, outings, therapy involvement in activities, and salon/personal care events are mentioned as contributors to resident engagement. However, some reviewers say outings are limited and memory-care activities may be insufficient as residents’ needs progress.
Management, operations, and value evoke some of the strongest disagreements. Positive reviews highlight good communication, collaborative care planning, and a well-run facility with caring staff. Negative reviews focus on perceived mismanagement, unhelpful administration, county ownership issues, and concerns about privatization of care and food services. Several reviewers characterize the facility as overpriced or not good value—“twice the price, half the care” is representative of the strongest criticisms—while others felt costs were justified by care and services. Transfer restrictions tied to Ozaukee County were also mentioned as an operational limitation.
Pattern summary and implication for prospective families: the reviews indicate Lasata Senior Living Campus can deliver very good rehabilitation outcomes, an active programs schedule, attractive outdoor spaces, and attentive caregivers—especially in some units or during certain periods. At the same time, experiences vary substantially: some families encounter poor communication, staff turnover, medication and safety issues, maintenance lapses, and concerns about management and costs. This polarity suggests that outcomes are sensitive to timing, staffing levels, and unit-specific leadership. Prospective residents and families should plan an in-person tour that includes observation of staff-resident interactions across shifts, direct questions about staffing ratios, medication management procedures, emergency-call functionality, air conditioning and climate control in units, recent maintenance records, and the facility’s plan for ongoing remodeling and privatization if relevant. Asking for references from recent families and for written summaries of care meeting practices, therapy outcomes, and transfer restrictions (Ozaukee County rules) will help clarify whether the campus is a good fit for an individual’s clinical needs and expectations.
