These reviews present a strongly mixed and polarized picture of Rocky Mountain Assisted Living, with some families reporting exceptional, compassionate care and others describing serious safety, management, and hygiene problems. Positive feedback centers on the direct caregiving staff and their interactions with residents, while negative feedback focuses heavily on systemic issues that reviewers say originate with management or ownership.
Care quality and clinical issues: Several reviewers praise the caregiving staff as kind, genuine, hands-on, and attentive, with accounts of proactive medication administration and improvements in residents' moods and successful transitions. In stark contrast, other reviewers report severe clinical lapses: omitted or delayed pain medications (including reports of Ativan not given for weeks), alleged failure to follow physicians' orders (for example, not using a prescribed back brace after a fall), slow responses to emergencies, and at least one fall that resulted in injury. These reports suggest inconsistent clinical practice — some families experience reliable medication management and attentive care, while others report potentially dangerous neglect. Multiple reviewers also indicate a lack of accountability when clinical problems are raised.
Staff, management, and communication: Reviews repeatedly distinguish between frontline caregivers and ownership/management. Frontline staff are frequently described as caring, communicative, and accommodating; several reviewers appreciated ongoing dialogue with management, felt transitions were handled well, and would recommend the facility. Conversely, a number of reviews describe the owner as unsupportive or bullying toward staff, focused on profit, and unresponsive to concerns. Reported slow responses from management, arbitrary visitation denials, and contract enforcement (e.g., requirement for 30 days' payment) despite serious complaints contribute to a perception of inconsistent or problematic leadership. Some reviewers invited involvement of the Ombudsman, indicating escalation of concerns outside the facility.
Hygiene, food safety, and environmental concerns: Several serious hygiene and safety allegations appear in the negative reviews. These include reports of rodents, no availability of hand soap for an extended period (one review cites ten months), raw thawed chicken left on a counter, and general poor food handling. There are also reports of soiled bedding and stains not being cleaned. These claims, if accurate, indicate lapses in basic infection control and food-safety practices that could pose significant risks to residents.
Administrative and financial issues: Multiple reviewers allege financial mismanagement and at least one unlawful eviction. Reviewers also raised concerns about enforced contract terms (payment for 30 days) even in the context of serious complaints or termination. These administrative issues amplify the safety and management concerns because they affect families' ability to advocate for residents and to resolve disputes.
Activities, environment, and suitability: On a more positive note, several reviewers highlight daily outdoor activities, a clean home (in some accounts), and an environment that uplifted residents' moods. Some families report that the facility was a perfect fit for their relative, with attentive staff and a positive transition experience. Others say the facility looked good but was ultimately not suitable for their loved one, including comments about distance or location concerns.
Overall pattern and recommendations: The reviews reflect a clear split: many direct-care staff members are praised for compassion and hands-on care, while recurring and serious allegations target management practices, sanitation, medication administration inconsistency, and adherence to clinical orders. Because the reported problems include infection-control lapses, medication non-administration, ignored physician instructions, and alleged unlawful eviction, these are red flags that warrant careful verification. Prospective residents and families should conduct thorough, in-person tours; ask to speak privately with multiple staff and current families; review recent inspection and Ombudsman records; verify medication administration practices and staffing/training policies; inspect food-preparation and housekeeping practices; and review contract terms about termination and payment. The polarized reviews indicate that experiences at this facility may vary greatly depending on the unit, staff on duty, and management involvement, so due diligence and direct verification are essential before making placement decisions.
