Overall sentiment in the reviews is mixed and polarized: many reviewers praise the direct care staff, dining, activities, and apartment amenities, while a substantial number of reviews allege serious operational, safety, and management failures—particularly in the memory care program. Positive comments emphasize compassionate, helpful employees who provide emotional support, assist with moves and visits, and create a pleasant visiting environment. Dining is consistently highlighted as a strong point in many reviews: meals are described as nutritious, home-cooked, and well-liked, with fruit and vegetable options and strong dining service. Activities, including pet therapy and a broad activities program, are frequently cited as making life more social and engaging for residents. Several reviewers mention private rooms, private bathrooms, up-to-date amenities, and some spacious apartments that contributed to an improved quality of life for their loved ones.
However, the negative reports raise significant concerns about care quality and administration. Multiple reviews allege poor sanitation, lack of supervision, and inadequate medical or transfer equipment. Hygiene supply shortages, insufficient bathing, long waits for bathroom assistance, and instances described as neglect or improper care appear repeatedly. Some reviewers specifically describe serious safety risks in the memory care unit—including alleged starvation risk, lack of heat, and a poorly run program located in the basement—while others note that memory care is staffed by lower-quality personnel compared with the rest of the community. Several reviews reference an ombudsman getting involved and allege false documentation or dishonesty around personnel actions, which suggests systemic accountability problems rather than isolated incidents.
Staffing and culture are a major theme with a clear split: frontline staff are repeatedly described as amazing, caring, and collaborative, with teamwork making a tangible difference for residents. Those positive accounts include statements about respectful treatment, privacy, timely medication administration, and staff who create a stable home-like environment. At the same time, many reviews criticize management and leadership—calling them uneducated, clueless, money-driven, or interfering with care. Specific allegations include managers preventing appropriate care, administrative gossip (an LPN talking about employees), discrimination against workers, and leadership drama. These management complaints correlate with other negative themes (poor communication, phones off, alleged dishonesty about staff firings) and point to a pattern where strong frontline caregiving is undermined by problematic administration.
Facility and environment feedback is mixed: numerous reviewers praised cleanliness, private apartments with kitchens, and a quiet, pleasant atmosphere. Conversely, problems reported include a persistent smell issue, very small rooms in some units, and the placement of memory care in the basement with reported lack of heat. These physical and environmental problems are especially damaging when they affect vulnerable residents in memory care.
Communication and responsiveness are inconsistent across reviews. Several families noted good communication and recommended the community strongly, while others described unresponsive staff, phones that are routinely off, and poor or misleading communication from administration. Where communication and leadership are effective, reviewers describe timely medication, responsive care, and confidence in placing family members. Where communication fails, reviews raise safety and trust concerns and even advise families to seek care elsewhere.
In summary, the reviews portray a community with meaningful strengths and serious weaknesses. Strengths center on compassionate frontline staff, strong dining and activity programs, and comfortable apartments for many residents. Weaknesses are concentrated in operational and managerial areas—especially within the memory care unit—where allegations include neglect, inadequate supplies and equipment, sanitation issues, and problematic leadership/communication. The pattern suggests that families considering this community should weigh positive reports about day-to-day caregiving and quality-of-life features against repeated and specific allegations about management practices and memory care safety. The most consistent and concerning trend across reviews is that problems are often administrative or systemic (requiring oversight, corrective action, or external review) rather than solely interpersonal or occasional lapses in care.
