Overall sentiment in the reviews for Our House Senior Living - Medford Assisted Living is strongly positive, with the overwhelming majority of comments focused on the quality, compassion, and engagement of the caregiving staff. Many reviews emphasize that caregivers are kind, patient, and treat residents like family; specific staff members and leaders (for example, Bre and Maya) receive repeated praise for leadership, warmth, and direct involvement in resident care. Families report relief and peace of mind from trusting staff, noting quick responses to concerns and an active director-level oversight when issues arise.
Care quality and staff interaction are the clearest strengths. Reviewers frequently describe staff as caring, dedicated, and personally engaged—leading activities, involving residents in meal prep and baking, and fostering special one-on-one relationships. The facility is described as creating a home-like, comforting environment where residents smile, socialize, and participate in many events. Staff communication is highlighted as excellent in many accounts, with some families calling out regular and informative Facebook updates and proactive outreach from management. This combination of clinical attentiveness and personal warmth is the dominant positive theme.
Resident life and activities appear robust. Multiple reviews mention planned group activities, seasonal events, outdoor activities, and opportunities for residents to participate in meaningful ways (meal prep, baking afternoons, gardens). These social offerings contribute to a sense of community and help residents stay engaged and happy. Reviewers say residents are social and enjoying company, which supports the impression of a lively, resident-centered culture.
The facility and grounds receive strong marks for cleanliness, aesthetic appeal, and outdoor amenities. Reviewers praise a clean building, family rooms, a large kitchen, patio space, plants and gardens, and a generally attractive location that gives a “country feel in town.” These physical attributes reinforce the home-like atmosphere many families appreciate. At the same time, specific concerns about physical accommodations appear: several comments note that some rooms are small, and a few residents/families feel particular rooms have an institutional or nursing-home feel rather than fully homelike decor.
Dining is mostly reported positively—many families describe the meals as delicious, healthy, and adaptable to individual needs. However, there are a number of reviews calling out inconsistent food quality over time, with at least one family saying food “became barely edible” and that kitchen staffing/improvements were needed. This points to a mixed picture where dining can be a strength but may suffer from variability tied to staff changes or operational lapses.
Management and operational patterns show both strengths and weaknesses. Several reviewers praise management for going above and beyond to create tailored care plans and for strong leaders who support both staff and residents. Yet others recall past management conflicts or mixed experiences with different managers. A notable and serious concern in the reviews is a financial/Medicaid policy issue: at least one family reported eviction after Medicaid/funds ran out, which created a negative experience and suggests financial policy enforcement can be a pain point for residents and families. Another operational issue that recurs is high staff turnover—families note it limits the chance to meet all staff and may contribute to inconsistency in food quality and temperature control in rooms. Heating and temperature variability (some west-side rooms too hot; east-side rooms too cold) was also flagged and required temporary solutions like space heaters.
In summary, Our House Senior Living - Medford is consistently praised for compassionate, relationship-driven caregiving, a clean and attractive facility, active resident programming, and strong moments of responsive management. The dominant value for families appears to be the staff’s personal investment in residents’ well-being. Primary areas to watch or improve include staff retention to ensure continuity of care, addressing small or institutional-feeling rooms, stabilizing dining quality, resolving heating/temperature inconsistencies, and clarifying financial/Medicaid policies to prevent distressing outcomes. Taken together, the reviews portray a facility with genuine strengths in person-centered care and community life, tempered by operational challenges that, if addressed, could further strengthen the resident and family experience.
