Overall sentiment in these reviews is mixed but leans strongly negative, with a consistent pattern of serious quality and safety concerns tempered by isolated positive experiences. Across many submissions, families and residents report neglectful care, understaffing, and management failures that led to missed or delayed medical interventions, poor hygiene, and, in some cases, severe health consequences. At the same time, multiple reviewers explicitly praised individual nurses, CNAs, therapists, and a few clinicians who were compassionate, effective, and in some instances helped patients return home. This produces a polarized picture: pockets of competent, caring staff operating within what reviewers describe as a systemically flawed facility.
Care quality is the dominant theme in negative reviews. Recurrent issues include missed or delayed medications, improper catheter care, failure to reposition immobile residents for extended periods (reports of 12+ hours), and inconsistent wound or hygiene management. These problems are linked by reviewers to infections (UTIs, pneumonia), weight loss, and in at least one report, a toe amputation that families attribute to neglect. Some reviewers alleged deaths shortly after admission; others described very short stays where basic needs were not met. Medication handling concerns appear multiple times — both errors and CNAs administering pills improperly were mentioned — amplifying safety worries.
Staffing and staff behavior are another major area of concern. Many reviews mention chronic understaffing and high turnover, which reviewers tie to residents being left unattended, unanswered call lights, inconsistent showering and laundry service, and lack of monitoring. While several accounts singled out "amazing" or "excellent" nurses, there are also multiple allegations of rude or abusive staff behavior, rough handling of residents, caregivers acting beyond their scope, and even theft by caregivers. Police involvement was described in at least one theft/abuse case. Families also raised hiring concerns (alleged employment of staff with prior stealing convictions) and reported that management was often unresponsive to complaints or slow to act on investigations.
Facility conditions and amenities drew frequent criticism. Reviewers described small, crowded rooms cluttered with wheelchairs and medical equipment; dark, dreary, outdated interiors; strong urine or fecal odors; pests; and discarded cigarette butts on the grounds. Several reviews said residents went many days without showers or basic personal care, and that laundry was lost. Memory care specific issues were reported: lack of signage/wayfinding, inadequate activities, patients wandering into others' rooms, and generally unsafe conditions for cognitively impaired residents.
Rehabilitation and clinical services are a notable positive in some reviews: multiple families reported effective rehab therapy, particularly for mobility and swallowing, and said therapists were timely and helped achieve successful discharges. A subset of reviewers also praised timely medicines and compassionate clinical attention. Dining and activities responses were mixed: a few reviewers said meals were great, while others called the food awful and criticized the lack of stimulation or activities for residents.
Management and administrative responsiveness is a recurring complaint. Reviewers described administrators as unresponsive, dismissive, or slow to follow up; investigations were promised but follow-through was questioned. Conversely, some families felt supported by staff and management when care was prompt. This inconsistency suggests that the facility may have variability in leadership performance across shifts or units.
Notable patterns and specific incidents that stand out across reviews include: caregiver theft and police reports; allegations of physical roughness and abuse by CNAs; prolonged failure to respond to call lights; visible fecal contamination and persistent odors; reports of missed critical medications (including blood thinners) and delayed pain control; and instances where residents deteriorated rapidly after admission. These incidents, paired with repeated mentions of understaffing, paint a picture of systemic vulnerabilities in safety and quality control rather than isolated staff failings.
In summary, the reviews reflect a facility with meaningful strengths at the individual caregiver and therapy level but pervasive organizational and environmental problems that compromise resident safety and quality of life. Families considering this facility should weigh the possibility of excellent one-on-one care from certain staff members against recurring reports of neglect, cleanliness failures, medication and safety breaches, and inconsistent management responsiveness. For current residents and family members, documented patterns suggest a need for persistent oversight, clear communication with facility leadership, and rapid escalation to external authorities when safety concerns or abuse are suspected.
